requesting-code-review

SKILL.md

Requesting Code Review

Dispatch a code reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade. The reviewer gets precisely crafted context for evaluation — never your session's history. This keeps the reviewer focused on the work product, not your thought process, and preserves your own context for continued work.

Core principle: Review early, review often.

When to Request Review

Mandatory:

After each task in subagent-driven development

After completing major feature

Before merge to main

Optional but valuable:

When stuck (fresh perspective)

Before refactoring (baseline check)

After fixing complex bug

How to Request
1. Get git SHAs:

BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1)  # or origin/main
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

2. Dispatch code reviewer subagent:

Use Task tool with general-purpose type, fill template at code-reviewer.md

Placeholders:

{DESCRIPTION} - Brief summary of what you built

{PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS} - What it should do

{BASE_SHA} - Starting commit

{HEAD_SHA} - Ending commit

3. Act on feedback:

Fix Critical issues immediately

Fix Important issues before proceeding

Note Minor issues for later

Push back if reviewer is wrong (with reasoning)

Example

[Just completed Task 2: Add verification function]

You: Let me request code review before proceeding.

BASE_SHA=$(git log --oneline | grep "Task 1" | head -1 | awk '{print $1}')
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

[Dispatch code reviewer subagent]
  DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types
  PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from docs/superpowers/plans/deployment-plan.md
  BASE_SHA: a7981ec
  HEAD_SHA: 3df7661

[Subagent returns]:
  Strengths: Clean architecture, real tests
  Issues:
    Important: Missing progress indicators
    Minor: Magic number (100) for reporting interval
  Assessment: Ready to proceed

You: [Fix progress indicators]
[Continue to Task 3]

Integration with Workflows

Subagent-Driven Development:

Review after EACH task

Catch issues before they compound

Fix before moving to next task

Executing Plans:

Review after each task or at natural checkpoints

Get feedback, apply, continue

Ad-Hoc Development:

Review before merge

Review when stuck

Red Flags

Never:

Skip review because "it's simple"

Ignore Critical issues

Proceed with unfixed Important issues

Argue with valid technical feedback

If reviewer wrong:

Push back with technical reasoning

Show code/tests that prove it works

Request clarification

See template at: requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md