Skill391 repo starsupdated 4d ago

requesting-code-review

This skill dispatches a specialized code-reviewer subagent to evaluate completed work by examining git commits between two SHAs, using the reviewer's separate context to catch issues before they reach production. Use it after finishing tasks in subagent-driven development, upon completing major features, before merging to main, or when stuck and needing a fresh perspective on code quality and requirements alignment.

View source Repository: claude-skills-journalism

Install in Claude Code

Copy

git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jamditis/claude-skills-journalism /tmp/requesting-code-review && cp -r /tmp/requesting-code-review/superjawn/skills/requesting-code-review ~/.claude/skills/requesting-code-review

Then start a new Claude Code session; the skill loads automatically.

Definition

SKILL.md

<!--
Adapted from obra/superpowers requesting-code-review skill (v5.0.7),
MIT-licensed, copyright 2025 Jesse Vincent. Modifications copyright 2026 Joe Amditis. v0.4.0 ports as a consumer category, no research
phase per the v0.2.0 architecture, since dispatch mechanic; reviewer
preferences live in CLAUDE.md and memory rather than a research phase.
See CREDITS.md.
-->

# Requesting Code Review

Dispatch pr-review-toolkit: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:**
```bash
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 pr-review-toolkit:code-reviewer type, fill template at `code-reviewer.md`

**Placeholders:**
- `{WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED}` - What you just built
- `{PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS}` - What it should do
- `{BASE_SHA}` - Starting commit
- `{HEAD_SHA}` - Ending commit
- `{DESCRIPTION}` - Brief summary

**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 pr-review-toolkit:code-reviewer subagent]
  WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED: Verification and repair functions for conversation index
  PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from docs/superpowers/plans/deployment-plan.md
  BASE_SHA: a7981ec
  HEAD_SHA: 3df7661
  DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types

[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 batch (3 tasks)
- 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