requesting-code-review

Name: requesting-code-review
Author: obra

Dispatch code review subagents with focused context to catch issues before they compound. Integrates with subagent-driven development workflows, triggering review after each task or before merging to main Provides code-reviewer subagent with precise git SHAs, implementation details, and requirements, keeping reviewer focused on work product rather than session history Categorizes feedback into Critical (fix immediately), Important (fix before proceeding), and Minor (note for later) severity levels Includes template-based dispatch mechanism using Task tool with placeholders for implementation summary, requirements, commit range, and description

INSTALLATION

npx skills add https://github.com/obra/superpowers --skill requesting-code-review

Run in your project or agent environment. Adjust flags if your CLI version differs.

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