mirror of
https://github.com/bitwarden/android.git
synced 2026-02-03 18:17:54 -06:00
refactor(claude): Simplify code-review command to use reviewing-changes skill
This commit simplifies the `code-review` command by delegating the core logic to the new `reviewing-changes` skill. The previous verbose template, which included detailed instructions and a complex output format for manual reviews, has been removed. The new implementation directly invokes the `reviewing-changes` skill with the pull request URL. Specific changes include: - Replaced the extensive review template in `.claude/commands/code-review.md` with a simpler command definition. - The command now accepts a PR URL as its primary argument. - It is explicitly defined to use the `reviewing-changes` skill for the review process. - Output requirements are now specified to be written to `pr-review-summary.md` and `pr-review-inline-comments.md`.
This commit is contained in:
parent
e5d887edf8
commit
00bf96bcd4
@ -1,82 +1,19 @@
|
||||
Use this template to review a PR diff with focused, actionable feedback.
|
||||
---
|
||||
description: Initiate a code review on a specific pull request, using the `reviewing-changes` skill.
|
||||
argument-hint: PR URL
|
||||
version: 1.0.0
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## INPUTS
|
||||
|
||||
- PR diff - the pull request diff to review
|
||||
- (optional) PR description
|
||||
- (optional) Ticket links
|
||||
- PR
|
||||
|
||||
## INSTRUCTIONS
|
||||
|
||||
1. Scan the PR diff for correctness, style, security, and performance.
|
||||
2. Ground comments in the project context (frameworks, languages, databases, messaging systems).
|
||||
3. Prefer specific inline suggestions with minimal working patches.
|
||||
4. Flag test gaps and missing docs. Propose concrete test cases.
|
||||
5. Label severity: Blocker, Major, Minor, Nit.
|
||||
6. Keep lines ≤80 chars.
|
||||
Use the `reviewing-changes` skill to review pull request $1. This is a local code review, do not post any feedback to GitHub.
|
||||
|
||||
## OUTPUT FORMAT
|
||||
|
||||
### Summary
|
||||
- **Scope:**
|
||||
- **Impact:**
|
||||
- **Risk level:**
|
||||
|
||||
### Positives
|
||||
- **Code quality wins:**
|
||||
- **Good patterns:**
|
||||
- **Tests/documentation:**
|
||||
|
||||
### Issues by Severity
|
||||
|
||||
#### Blockers
|
||||
- [file:line] Problem → Why it matters → Fix suggestion
|
||||
```
|
||||
// patchlet
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
#### Major
|
||||
- ...
|
||||
|
||||
#### Minor
|
||||
- ...
|
||||
|
||||
#### Nits
|
||||
- ...
|
||||
|
||||
### Security & Compliance
|
||||
- **Authentication/authorization:**
|
||||
- **Input validation/injection prevention:**
|
||||
- **Secrets/logging/sensitive data:**
|
||||
- **Third-party integrations:**
|
||||
- **Data privacy/compliance:**
|
||||
|
||||
### Performance
|
||||
- **Hot paths:**
|
||||
- **Database query optimization:**
|
||||
- **Caching/TTL:**
|
||||
- **Async/concurrency handling:**
|
||||
|
||||
### Testing Gaps
|
||||
- **Unit:**
|
||||
- **Integration/e2e:**
|
||||
- **Property/fuzz:**
|
||||
- **Load/reliability:**
|
||||
|
||||
### Documentation
|
||||
- **Changelog:**
|
||||
- **Architecture notes:**
|
||||
- **README/code comments:**
|
||||
|
||||
### Inline Review
|
||||
- [file path]
|
||||
- line X: comment
|
||||
- line Y: comment
|
||||
|
||||
### Review Checklist
|
||||
- [ ] Builds/CI green
|
||||
- [ ] Lint/format pass
|
||||
- [ ] Tests updated/added
|
||||
- [ ] Backward compatible
|
||||
- [ ] Feature flagged
|
||||
- [ ] Observability added
|
||||
- Overall summary must be written to `pr-review-summary.md`.
|
||||
- Inline comments must be written to `pr-review-inline-comments.md`.
|
||||
- Output files must be written, even if there are no issues found.
|
||||
|
||||
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user