requesting-code-review
💡 Summary
A workflow skill that dispatches a code-reviewer subagent to validate changes against a plan before proceeding or merging.
🎯 Target Audience
🤖 AI Roast: “It's a glorified to-do list for asking your AI friend to check your homework, but at least it's a disciplined friend.”
The skill dispatches a subagent which likely executes code; ensure the 'code-reviewer' subagent is from a trusted source and runs in a sandboxed environment to prevent arbitrary code execution. Review the subagent's own permissions for file system and network access.
name: requesting-code-review description: Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements
Requesting Code Review
Dispatch superpowers:code-reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade.
Core principle: Review early, review often.
When to Request Review
Mandatory:
- After each task in subagent-driven development
- 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=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1) # or origin/main HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
2. Dispatch code-reviewer subagent:
Use Task tool with superpowers:code-reviewer type, fill template at code-reviewer.md
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
3. 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 log --oneline | grep "Task 1" | head -1 | awk '{print $1}')
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
[Dispatch superpowers:code-reviewer subagent]
WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED: Verification and repair functions for conversation index
PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from docs/plans/deployment-plan.md
BASE_SHA: a7981ec
HEAD_SHA: 3df7661
DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types
[Subagent 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
Subagent-Driven Development:
- 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
If reviewer wrong:
- Push back with technical reasoning
- Show code/tests that prove it works
- Request clarification
See template at: requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md
Pros
- Enforces disciplined, incremental review cycles
- Integrates directly into AI-driven development workflows
- Clear escalation and action guidelines for feedback
Cons
- Heavily reliant on the quality of the underlying 'code-reviewer' subagent
- Adds overhead for very simple changes
- Requires git history and commit discipline
Related Skills
claude-ctx-plugin
A“This plugin is so comprehensive it probably has a skill for managing its own existential dread.”
pytorch
S“It's the Swiss Army knife of deep learning, but good luck figuring out which of the 47 installation methods is the one that won't break your system.”
agno
S“It promises to be the Kubernetes for agents, but let's see if developers have the patience to learn yet another orchestration layer.”
Disclaimer: This content is sourced from GitHub open source projects for display and rating purposes only.
Copyright belongs to the original author obra.
