Requesting code review

Requesting Code Review

Use this skill to run a focused review before moving on, opening a PR, or declaring a change done. Prefer a review that is grounded in the actual git diff and requirements, not in vague recollection.

Core principle: Review early, review often.

When to Request Review

Mandatory:

• After each major implementation batch
• 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:

BASE_SHA=$(git merge-base HEAD origin/main 2>/dev/null || git rev-parse HEAD~1)
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

If origin/main is unavailable, replace it with the right base branch or explicit commit.

2. Gather review context:

git diff --stat "$BASE_SHA..$HEAD_SHA"
git diff "$BASE_SHA..$HEAD_SHA"

Also collect the requirement source you are reviewing against:

• plan doc
• ticket
• acceptance criteria
• user request in this thread

3. Run the review in Codex:

• Default: ask for a review in the current Codex session and use the checklist in code-reviewer.md
• If /review is available and the repo is ready, use it
• Only use a separate reviewer agent when the user explicitly asks for delegation or subagents

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

4. 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=$(git merge-base HEAD origin/main)
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

[Run review using code-reviewer.md checklist against BASE_SHA..HEAD_SHA]
 WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED: Verification and repair functions for conversation index
 PLAN_REFERENCE: Task 2 from docs/superpowers/plans/deployment-plan.md
 BASE_SHA: a7981ec
 HEAD_SHA: 3df7661
 DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types

[Review 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

Implementation Batches:

• 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
• Review against memory alone instead of the actual diff

If reviewer wrong:

• Push back with technical reasoning
• Show code/tests that prove it works
• Request clarification

See checklist at: requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md