SRE Code Review

Perform a comprehensive SRE review of: $ARGUMENTS

Framework

This review uses the ROAD framework (Response, Observability, Availability, Delivery) combined with SEEMS (failure categories) and FaCTOR (resilience properties).

Process

Step 1: Identify Scope

First, identify what code needs to be reviewed:

• •If $ARGUMENTS is a file or directory, review that directly
• •If $ARGUMENTS is empty or ".", review recent changes (git diff) or prompt for scope
• •If $ARGUMENTS is a PR number, fetch the diff

Step 2: Run Parallel Reviews

Spawn 4 subagents in parallel to review different aspects:

1. •sre-response - Incident handling, error messages, runbook readiness
2. •sre-observability - Logging, metrics, tracing, SLI derivability
3. •sre-availability - SLOs, circuit breakers, resilience patterns
4. •sre-delivery - Deployment safety, rollback, feature flags

Each agent should:

• •Read the relevant prompt from .claude/prompts/sre/
• •Review the code against their checklist
• •Return findings in table format

Step 3: Synthesize Results

After all agents complete:

1. •Collect findings from all 4 pillars
2. •Deduplicate — Some issues may be flagged by multiple reviewers
3. •Aggregate maturity assessments — Merge criteria assessments from all subagents into one maturity view
4. •Determine maturity status per level:
   • •All criteria ✅ → pass (✅)
   • •Mix of ✅ and ❌ → partial (⚠️)
   • •All criteria ❌ → fail (❌)
   • •Previous level not passed → locked (🔒)
5. •Prioritize findings by maturity level (HYG first), then severity (HIGH → LOW)

Output Format

# SRE Review — Maturity Assessment

## Maturity Status

| Level | Status | Summary |
|-------|--------|---------|
| Hygiene | ✅/⚠️/❌ | [one-line summary] |
| Level 1 — Foundations | ✅/⚠️/❌/🔒 | [one-line summary] |
| Level 2 — Operational Maturity | ✅/⚠️/❌/🔒 | [one-line summary] |
| Level 3 — Excellence | ✅/⚠️/❌/🔒 | [one-line summary] |

**Immediate Action:** [Top hygiene failure if hygiene not passed, else top action from next achievable level]

---

## Hygiene

[If any failures: list them with severity, category, location, finding, recommendation]
[If all pass: ✅ All hygiene criteria met]

## [Next Achievable Level] — Detailed Assessment

For each criterion:
- ✅ **[Criterion]** — Evidence: `file:line` description
- ❌ **[Criterion]** — Missing: what should exist
- ⚠️ **[Criterion]** — Partial: what's there and what's missing

## Higher Levels — Preview

> **Level [N+1]**: [Brief list of criteria — not yet assessed in detail]
> **Level [N+2]**: [Brief list of criteria]

---

## Detailed Findings

| Priority | Severity | Maturity | Category | Location | Finding | Recommendation |
|----------|----------|----------|----------|----------|---------|----------------|

## What's Good

[Positive SRE patterns observed — resilience patterns done well, good observability practices, etc.]