# code-review

> Review branch changes for correctness, regressions, architecture quality, and project-rule compliance. Use when asked to review a PR/branch/diff, assess merge readiness, or return an APPROVE/REJECT verdict with prioritized findings.

- Author: Filip Wojciechowski
- Repository: fwojciec/quiver
- Version: 20260206231002
- Stars: 2
- Forks: 0
- Last Updated: 2026-02-07
- Source: https://github.com/fwojciec/quiver
- Web: https://mule.run/skillshub/@@fwojciec/quiver~code-review:20260206231002

---

---
name: code-review
description: "Review branch changes for correctness, regressions, architecture quality, and project-rule compliance. Use when asked to review a PR/branch/diff, assess merge readiness, or return an APPROVE/REJECT verdict with prioritized findings."
---

# Code Review

Run a structured review against project standards and return a clear merge recommendation.

## Workflow

1. Determine diff scope. **Staged changes take priority** since workflows often stage before committing:

```bash
BASE_BRANCH="${BASE_BRANCH:-main}"

# Check for staged changes first (workflows stage before commit)
STAGED_CHANGES=$(git diff --cached --stat 2>/dev/null)
COMMITTED_CHANGES=$(git diff "$BASE_BRANCH"...HEAD --stat 2>/dev/null)

if [ -n "$STAGED_CHANGES" ]; then
  echo "DIFF_MODE: staged"
  echo "Reviewing staged changes (not yet committed)"
  echo "---"
  git diff --cached --stat
  # Use: git diff --cached
elif [ -n "$COMMITTED_CHANGES" ]; then
  echo "DIFF_MODE: committed"
  echo "Reviewing commits since $BASE_BRANCH"
  echo "---"
  git diff "$BASE_BRANCH"...HEAD --stat
  # Use: git diff "$BASE_BRANCH"...HEAD
else
  echo "ERROR: No staged or committed changes to review"
  echo "Nothing to review - aborting"
  exit 1
fi

git log "$BASE_BRANCH"..HEAD --oneline 2>/dev/null || echo "No commits yet"
```

2. Load local standards and conventions.

```bash
[ -f AGENTS.md ] && cat AGENTS.md
[ -f CLAUDE.md ] && cat CLAUDE.md
```

Also read crate/package-local guidance files in changed directories when present.

3. Evaluate with `references/review-criteria.md`.

4. Return this exact format:

```text
VERDICT: APPROVE | REJECT

SUMMARY:
<1-2 sentence overview>

STRENGTHS:
<what is well done; cite file:line>

ISSUES:

Critical (Must Fix):
<bugs, security, data loss, broken behavior, or "None">

Important (Should Fix):
<architecture, reliability, test gaps, or "None">

Minor (Nice to Have):
<style, cleanup, docs, or "None">

VERDICT REASONING:
<1 sentence for approve/reject decision>
```

Prefer REJECT when critical defects or merge-blocking important issues exist.