mcpField
R
review

review

github.com/parcadeiTesting & quality3.9k521 installsUpdated 39w ago
Repository

About review

review is a code review workflow skill that coordinates specialist agents to assess code quality, design alignment, and change risk. It supports full, quick, security-focused, and pull request review modes, then synthesizes findings into a verdict and recommendations.

Key features

  1. 01Runs parallel specialist reviews
  2. 02Checks code quality and readability
  3. 03Assesses design alignment and change risk
  4. 04Offers full, quick, security, and PR modes
  5. 05Synthesizes findings into a verdict

Use cases

  1. 01Reviewing a feature before merging
  2. 02Getting quick feedback on code quality
  3. 03Assessing security concerns in a change
  4. 04Reviewing a pull request

Install

Copy the command and run it in a terminal.

$npx skills add https://github.com/parcadei/continuous-claude-v3 --skill review

After installing, type/reviewin Claude Code to confirm it loaded.

Details

From the project README

/review - Code Review Workflow

Multi-perspective code review with parallel specialists.

When to Use

  • "Review this code"
  • "Review my PR"
  • "Check this before I merge"
  • "Get feedback on implementation"
  • Before merging significant changes
  • Quality gates

Workflow Overview

         ┌──────────┐
         │  critic  │ ─┐
         │ (code)   │  │
         └──────────┘  │
                       │
         ┌──────────┐  │      ┌──────────────┐
         │plan-reviewer│ ─┼────▶ │ review-agent │
         │ (plan)   │  │      │ (synthesis)  │
         └──────────┘  │      └──────────────┘
                       │
         ┌──────────┐  │
         │plan-reviewer│ ─┘
         │ (change) │
         └──────────┘

         Parallel                Sequential
         perspectives            synthesis

Agent Sequence

#AgentFocusExecution
1criticCode quality, patterns, readabilityParallel
1plan-reviewerArchitecture, plan adherenceParallel
1plan-reviewerChange impact, risk assessmentParallel
2review-agentSynthesize all reviews, final verdictAfter 1

Review Perspectives

  • critic: Is this good code? (Style, patterns, readability)
  • plan-reviewer: Does this match the design? (Architecture, plan)
  • plan-reviewer: Is this change safe? (Risk, impact, regressions)
  • review-agent: Overall assessment and recommendations

Execution

Phase 1: Parallel Reviews
# Code quality review
Task(
  subagent_type="critic",
  prompt="""
  Review code quality: [SCOPE]

  Evaluate:
  - Code style and consistency
  - Design patterns used
  - Readability and maintainability
  - Error handling
  - Test coverage

  Output: List of issues with severity (critical/major/minor)
  """,
  run_in_background=true
)

# Architecture review
Task(
  subagent_type="plan-reviewer",
  prompt="""
  Review architecture alignment: [SCOPE]

  Check:
  - Follows established patterns
  - Matches implementation plan (if exists)
  - Consistent with system design
  - No architectural violations

  Output: Alignment assessment with concerns
  """,
  run_in_background=true
)

# Change impact review
Task(
  subagent_type="plan-reviewer",
  prompt="""
  Review change impact: [SCOPE]

  Assess:
  - Risk level of changes
  - Affected systems/components
  - Backward compatibility
  - Potential regressions
  - Security implications

  Output: Risk assessment with recommendations
  """,
  run_in_background=true
)

# Wait for all parallel reviews
[Check TaskOutput for all three]
Phase 2: Synthesis
Task(
  subagent_type="review-agent",
  prompt="""
  Synthesize reviews for: [SCOPE]

  Reviews:
  - critic: [code quality findings]
  - plan-reviewer: [architecture findings]
  - plan-reviewer: [change impact findings]

  Create final review:
  - Overall verdict (APPROVE / REQUEST_CHANGES / NEEDS_DISCUSSION)
  - Prioritized action items
  - Blocking vs non-blocking issues
  - Summary for PR description
  """
)

Review Modes

Full Review
User: /review
→ All four agents, comprehensive review
Quick Review
User: /review --quick
→ critic only, fast feedback
Security Focus
User: /review --security
→ Add aegis (security agent) to parallel phase
PR Review
User: /review PR #123
→ Fetch PR diff, review changes

Example

User: /review the authentication changes

Claude: Starting /review workflow...

Phase 1: Running parallel reviews...
┌────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ critic: Reviewing code quality...          │
│ plan-reviewer: Checking architecture...         │
│ plan-reviewer: Assessing change impact...         │
└────────────────────────────────────────────┘

critic: Found 2 issues
- [minor] Inconsistent error messages in auth.ts
- [major] Missing input validation in login()

plan-reviewer: ✅ Matches authentication plan

plan-reviewer: Medium risk
- Affects: login, signup, password reset
- Breaking change: session token format

Phase 2: Synthesizing...

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Review Summary                              │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Verdict: REQUEST_CHANGES                    │
│                                             │
│ Blocking:                                   │
│ 1. Add input validation to login()          │
│                                             │
│ Non-blocking:                               │
│ 2. Standardize error messages               │
│                                             │
│ Notes:                                      │
│ - Document session token format change      │
│ - Consider migration path for existing      │
│   sessions                                  │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Verdicts

  • APPROVE: Ready to merge, all issues are minor
  • REQUEST_CHANGES: Blocking issues must be fixed
  • NEEDS_DISCUSSION: Architectural decisions need input

Comments

Markdown supported