<essential_principles>
Code Review Philosophy
Reviews exist to:
- Catch bugs before production
- Share knowledge across the team
- Maintain consistency in the codebase
Reviews do NOT exist to:
- Show off knowledge
- Enforce personal style preferences
- Block progress unnecessarily
The 3-Pass Method
Pass 1: Understand (don't comment yet)
- What is this change trying to do?
- What files are affected?
- What's the scope?
Pass 2: Correctness
- Are there bugs?
- Are edge cases handled?
- Are there security issues?
Pass 3: Improvements (max 5 comments)
- Is it readable?
- Is it maintainable?
- Are there better patterns?
Review Checklist
Must Check
- Tests pass
- No obvious bugs
- Edge cases handled
- No security vulnerabilities
- No secrets in code
Should Check
- Code is readable
- Functions < 50 lines
- Clear naming
- Helpful error messages
Nice to Check
- Performance considerations
- Documentation updated
- Consistent patterns
Feedback Style
DO:
- Ask questions: "What happens if X is null?"
- Be specific: "Line 42: Consider guard clause"
- Acknowledge good work: "Nice refactor"
- Limit comments: Max 5 per review
DON'T:
- Dictate: "You must do X"
- Be vague: "This could be better"
- Nitpick style: "I prefer single quotes" </essential_principles>
- Paste code/diff - I'll review inline
- Reference file - Use @filename
- Describe PR - I'll ask questions
Context:
- Bug fix / New feature / Refactor / Performance
Specific concerns? (Security, breaking changes, etc.)