git:20260625.50a3300 to git:20260628.4fd65a5

7 added, 0 removed. Audit A to A.

---

name: code-quality

description: "Code review to find quality issues, style violations, and code smells. Triggers on: review, code review, quality, lint, code smell, analyze code."

argument-hint: "<path or directory to review>"

---

# Code Quality

**IMPORTANT: Start your response with a context preamble.**

Call `help_lookup(topic="code-quality", mode="preamble")` and

display the returned `preamble` text as a blockquote. Then

tell the user they can say "tell me more" for a step-by-step

guide, or answer the scoping questions below to proceed.

If the MCP call fails, fall back to:

> **Code Quality** — Reviews your code for style issues, likely bugs, and structural problems in one pass.

## Scoping

Before running, ask:

1. **Scope**: "Which files or directory should I review?"

2. **Depth**: "Quick scan, thorough, or deep review?"

- Quick: code_review only

- Thorough: code_review + bug_predict combined

- Deep: deep_review (security + quality + test gaps)

## Execution

**Quick scan:**

```

code_review(path="<user-specified path>")

```

**Thorough analysis:**

```

code_review(path="<user-specified path>")

bug_predict(path="<user-specified path>")

```

Merge and deduplicate results from both tools.

**Deep review** (multi-pass: security, quality, test gaps):

```

deep_review(path="<user-specified path>")

```

## Output Format

+ **Prefer the rich panel.** If the tool response includes `panel_html`,

+ pass it to `mcp__visualize__show_widget` — the universal report panel

+ (title, score, findings/category sections; from

+ `attune.workflows.report_panel`). It shows an explicit "did not

+ complete" state on failure, never a false "clean". Fall back to the

+ markdown below when the widget surface is unavailable.

```markdown

## Code Quality Report

**Health:** X/100 | **Files:** Y | **Issues:** Z

### Issues by Category

| Category | Count | Severity |

|----------|-------|----------|

| Style | X | Low |

| Correctness | Y | High |

| Security | Z | Critical |

| Predicted Bugs | W | Medium |

### Details

|------|------|-------|--------|

### Predicted Bug Risks

| File | Pattern | Confidence |

|------|---------|------------|

```

## Help

After presenting results, call:

```

help_lookup(topic="code-quality", mode="workflow_help")

```

If templates are returned, offer: "I have tips about

code quality reviews — want to see them?"

## Follow-Up

After presenting results, offer:

- "Want me to fix these issues?"

- "Should I generate tests for the risky areas?"

- "Want to run a security-focused deep scan?"