git:20260507.56f011d to git:20260507.8dfdcb4

6 added, 14 removed. Audit A to C.

---

name: code-review

description: Structured code quality assessment with Conventional Comments format, scaled review depth, and soft-gating verdicts preserving user autonomy.

allowed-tools: Read, Bash, Grep, Glob, Agent, AskUserQuestion

- graph:

- domains: [domain:software-engineering]

- ---

- # Code Review

- ## Overview

- Assess code quality, design, correctness, and maintainability through a structured 9-step review workflow. Uses Conventional Comments format with file-specific references.

- ## When to Use

- - After implementation phase completes

+ graph:

+ domains: [domain:software-engineering]

+ skillAreas: [skill-area:agentic-loops, skill-area:orchestration-loop]

+ workflows: [workflow:feature-development]

+ topics: [topic:developer-experience]

+ roles: [role:tech-lead, role:backend-engineer]

- When reviewing code changes before merge

- As part of the /review-code command

## Process

1. Identify modified files via git

2. Assess change magnitude for review depth

3. Execute 9-step review: context, correctness, design, testing, security flags, operations, maintainability

4. Synthesize findings in standardized report

5. Deliver verdict with rationale

## Review Depth Scaling

- Under 200 lines: full detail review

- 200-1000 lines: focused review on critical areas

- Over 1000 lines: architectural-level review only

## Verdicts

- **APPROVE**: Ready for security review

- **APPROVE WITH NITS**: Non-blocking suggestions only

- **REQUEST CHANGES**: Blocking issues exist (user may override)

## Key Rules

- Provide specific file paths and line numbers

- Include at least one positive comment per review

- Use Conventional Comments format with decorations

- Explain reasoning, not just observations

- Limit critical issues to top 5 per category

- Reviews are soft gates preserving user autonomy

## Tool Use

Invoke via babysitter process: `methodologies/rpikit/rpikit-review`