requesting-code-review
Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements - dispatches core:code-reviewer subagent to review implementation against plan or requirements before proceeding
When & Why to Use This Skill
This Claude skill automates the code review process by dispatching a specialized subagent to verify implementations against specific requirements or plans. It helps developers maintain high code quality, catch architectural issues early, and ensure that every feature meets its intended goals before merging into the main branch. By integrating directly with Git SHAs, it provides a structured feedback loop for critical, important, and minor issues.
Use Cases
- Subagent-driven development: Automatically reviewing individual tasks as they are completed to prevent technical debt from cascading.
- Major feature verification: Validating complex implementations against original design documents or requirement plans before finalization.
- Pre-merge quality gates: Serving as a mandatory verification step before merging code into the main branch to ensure stability.
- Problem-solving and refactoring: Gaining a fresh perspective when stuck on a bug or establishing a baseline check before starting major code refactoring.
| name | requesting-code-review |
|---|---|
| description | Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements - dispatches core:code-reviewer subagent to review implementation against plan or requirements before proceeding |
| credit | https://github.com/obra |
Requesting Code Review
Dispatch core: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 core: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 core: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