Code Review Skill

This skill provides a structured approach to reviewing code, ensuring high quality, security, and adherence to project standards (as defined in tech_standards.md).

Verification Hierarchy

Review the code in this specific order of priority:

1. •

   Correctness & Logic (Critical)

   • •Does the code actually solve the problem?
   • •Are edge cases handled (nulls, empty lists, network failures)?
   • •Is the logic sound and bug-free?
   • •Action: If checking a fix, verify it doesn't break other parts (regression).
2. •

   Security (Critical - Refer to security-audit for deep dives)

   • •Input Validation: Are all inputs sanitized? (No raw SQL, no unsafe HTML).
   • •Secrets: Are API keys or credentials hardcoded? (Immediate FAIL if found).
   • •Auth: Is authentication/authorization bypassed or weak?
3. •

   Style & Standards (Important - Refer to tech_standards.md)

   • •Naming: Do variables/functions use clear, descriptive names? (e.g., isUserLoggedIn vs flag).
   • •Typing: Is any used? (Strictly forbidden). Are types explicit?
   • •Imports: Are path aliases (@/) used instead of relative paths (../../../)?
   • •Structure: Is the file too large? Should it be broken down?
4. •

   Performance (Optimization)

   • •Are there unnecessary loops or expensive computations?
   • •Is there redundant state re-rendering (frontend)?
   • •Are database queries optimized (N+1 problems)?

Output Format

Provide feedback in this format:

🚨 Critical Issues (Must Fix)

List logical bugs, security holes, or blocking standard violations.

⚠️ Improvements (Should Fix)

List style refactors, standard violations, or performance tweaks.

✅ Good Practices

Highlight clever solutions or clean implementations.

Recommended Action

Summary of what to do next (e.g., "Fix critical issues before commit" or "Approved with minor nits").