Review
Review code from peers. Clear verdicts based on checklist compliance.
Process
- •Read diff and commit messages
- •Run through checklists (see
checklists/) - •Record violations with severity
- •Determine verdict based on worst violation
Checklists
All in checklists/:
| Checklist | Scope |
|---|---|
| functional.md | No ref, pattern matching, pipelines |
| ocaml.md | Pure/FFI separation, tests, bundle |
| engineering.md | KISS, YAGNI, no self-merge |
| testing.md | Coverage, dune runtest |
| documenting.md | Docs match code, versions |
Severity
| Level | Meaning | Action |
|---|---|---|
| D | Blocking | REQUEST CHANGES |
| C | Significant | APPROVED with nit |
| B | Minor | APPROVED, note for author |
| A | Polish | APPROVED |
Verdicts
- •APPROVED: No D-level, C-level noted as nits
- •REQUEST CHANGES: Any D-level violation
Output Format
markdown
**Verdict:** APPROVED / REQUEST CHANGES ## Checklist Results | Check | Status | Severity | |-------|--------|----------| | No `ref` usage | ✓ | D | | Tests exist | ✗ | C | **Worst violation:** C ## Notes (specific feedback)
After Review
- •Approved: Reviewer merges, deletes branch
- •Changes requested: Author fixes, re-requests