/review - Code Review Workflow

Multi-perspective code review with parallel specialists.

When to Use

• "Review this code"

• "Review my PR"

• "Check this before I merge"

• "Get feedback on implementation"

• Before merging significant changes

• Quality gates

Workflow Overview

     ┌──────────┐
     │  critic  │ ─┐
     │ (code)   │  │
     └──────────┘  │
                   │
     ┌──────────┐  │      ┌──────────────┐
     │plan-reviewer│ ─┼────▶ │ review-agent │
     │ (plan)   │  │      │ (synthesis)  │
     └──────────┘  │      └──────────────┘
                   │
     ┌──────────┐  │
     │plan-reviewer│ ─┘
     │ (change) │
     └──────────┘

     Parallel                Sequential
     perspectives            synthesis

Agent Sequence

Agent Focus Execution

1 critic Code quality, patterns, readability Parallel

1 plan-reviewer Architecture, plan adherence Parallel

1 plan-reviewer Change impact, risk assessment Parallel

2 review-agent Synthesize all reviews, final verdict After 1

Review Perspectives

• critic: Is this good code? (Style, patterns, readability)

• plan-reviewer: Does this match the design? (Architecture, plan)

• plan-reviewer: Is this change safe? (Risk, impact, regressions)

• review-agent: Overall assessment and recommendations

Execution

Phase 1: Parallel Reviews

Code quality review

Task( subagent_type="critic", prompt=""" Review code quality: [SCOPE]

Evaluate:

• Code style and consistency
• Design patterns used
• Readability and maintainability
• Error handling
• Test coverage

Output: List of issues with severity (critical/major/minor) """, run_in_background=true )

Architecture review

Task( subagent_type="plan-reviewer", prompt=""" Review architecture alignment: [SCOPE]

Check:

• Follows established patterns
• Matches implementation plan (if exists)
• Consistent with system design
• No architectural violations

Output: Alignment assessment with concerns """, run_in_background=true )

Change impact review

Task( subagent_type="plan-reviewer", prompt=""" Review change impact: [SCOPE]

Assess:

• Risk level of changes
• Affected systems/components
• Backward compatibility
• Potential regressions
• Security implications

Output: Risk assessment with recommendations """, run_in_background=true )

Wait for all parallel reviews

[Check TaskOutput for all three]

Phase 2: Synthesis

Task( subagent_type="review-agent", prompt=""" Synthesize reviews for: [SCOPE]

Reviews:

• critic: [code quality findings]
• plan-reviewer: [architecture findings]
• plan-reviewer: [change impact findings]

Create final review:

• Overall verdict (APPROVE / REQUEST_CHANGES / NEEDS_DISCUSSION)
• Prioritized action items
• Blocking vs non-blocking issues
• Summary for PR description """ )

Review Modes

Full Review

User: /review → All four agents, comprehensive review

Quick Review

User: /review --quick → critic only, fast feedback

Security Focus

User: /review --security → Add aegis (security agent) to parallel phase

PR Review

User: /review PR #123 → Fetch PR diff, review changes

Example

User: /review the authentication changes

Claude: Starting /review workflow...

Phase 1: Running parallel reviews... ┌────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ critic: Reviewing code quality... │ │ plan-reviewer: Checking architecture... │ │ plan-reviewer: Assessing change impact... │ └────────────────────────────────────────────┘

critic: Found 2 issues

• [minor] Inconsistent error messages in auth.ts
• [major] Missing input validation in login()

plan-reviewer: ✅ Matches authentication plan

plan-reviewer: Medium risk

• Affects: login, signup, password reset
• Breaking change: session token format

Phase 2: Synthesizing...

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Review Summary │ ├─────────────────────────────────────────────┤ │ Verdict: REQUEST_CHANGES │ │ │ │ Blocking: │ │ 1. Add input validation to login() │ │ │ │ Non-blocking: │ │ 2. Standardize error messages │ │ │ │ Notes: │ │ - Document session token format change │ │ - Consider migration path for existing │ │ sessions │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Verdicts

• APPROVE: Ready to merge, all issues are minor

• REQUEST_CHANGES: Blocking issues must be fixed

• NEEDS_DISCUSSION: Architectural decisions need input