reviewing-code · diff
git:20260222.2b61bad to git:20260301.26f7262
1 added, 1 removed. Audit A to A.
---
name: reviewing-code
description: Provides concise, focused code reviews matching exact task complexity requirements. Use when reviewing code quality, security, or when the user asks for code review.
compatibility: Designed for Claude Code
allowed-tools: Read Grep Glob WebFetch WebSearch
metadata:
argument-hint: [file-or-directory]
---
# Review Context
- Changed files: !`git diff --name-only HEAD~1 2>/dev/null || echo "No recent commits"`
- Staged files: !`git diff --staged --name-only`
## Code Review
**Scope**: $ARGUMENTS
Delivers **focused, streamlined** code reviews matching stated task
requirements exactly. No over-analysis.
## Python Standards
- See `docs/best-practices/python-best-practices.md` for comprehensive Python guidelines.
+ See `references/python-best-practices.md` for comprehensive Python guidelines.
## Workflow
1. **Read task requirements** to understand expected scope
2. **Check `make validate`** passes before detailed review
3. **Match review depth** to task complexity (simple vs complex)
4. **Validate requirements** - does implementation match task scope exactly?
5. **Issue focused feedback** with specific file paths and line numbers
## Review Strategy
**Simple Tasks (100-200 lines)**: Security, compliance, requirements match,
basic quality
**Complex Tasks (500+ lines)**: Above plus architecture, performance,
comprehensive testing
**Always**: Use existing project patterns, immediate use after implementation
## Review Checklist
**Security & Compliance**:
- [ ] No security vulnerabilities (injection, XSS, etc.)
- [ ] Follows @AGENTS.md mandatory requirements
- [ ] Passes `make validate`
**Requirements Match**:
- [ ] Implements exactly what was requested
- [ ] No over-engineering or scope creep
- [ ] Appropriate complexity level
**Code Quality**:
- [ ] Follows project patterns in `src/`
- [ ] Proper type hints and docstrings
- [ ] Tests cover stated functionality
**Structural Health**:
- [ ] No function exceeds cognitive complexity threshold (suggested default: 15 per function, overridable per-project)
- [ ] No copy-paste duplication across methods (watch for repeated dispatch chains)
- [ ] File aggregate complexity — flag if trending above project norms (suggested default: 50 per file, overridable per-project)
## Output Standards
**Simple Tasks**: CRITICAL issues only, clear approval when requirements met
**Complex Tasks**: CRITICAL/WARNINGS/SUGGESTIONS with specific fixes
**All reviews**: Concise, streamlined, no unnecessary complexity analysis