Requesting Code Review

Dispatch a code-reviewer agent (or invoke /review if available) 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:

Dispatch a code-reviewer agent (or invoke /review if available) with the following context:

Placeholders to fill in:

• {WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED} - What you just built

• {PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS} - What it should do

• {BASE_SHA} - Starting commit

• {HEAD_SHA} - Ending commit

• {DESCRIPTION} - Brief summary

Review request template:

Please review the code changes between {BASE_SHA} and {HEAD_SHA}.

What was implemented: {WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED}

Requirements / plan reference: {PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS}

Summary: {DESCRIPTION}

Focus on:

- Correctness vs. requirements

- Missing edge cases or error handling

- Test quality (are tests testing real behavior or mocks?)

- Security concerns

- Code clarity and maintainability

Use project's code review template if one exists (e.g., check for a REVIEW_TEMPLATE or similar in the project docs).

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 agent or invoke /review]

  WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED: Verification and repair functions for conversation index

  PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from ai-workspace/plans/deployment-plan.md

  BASE_SHA: a7981ec

  HEAD_SHA: 3df7661

  DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types

[Reviewer 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

Inline Plan Execution:

• Review after each batch (3 tasks)

• 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