Code Review
Code review requires technical evaluation, not emotional performance.
Core principle: Verify before implementing. Ask before assuming. Technical correctness over social comfort.
Review Checklist
Backend (Python/FastAPI)
- All functions have type hints
copy.deepcopy()for mutable defaults- Error handling: detailed logs server-side, generic messages to clients
- API keys via
api_key=parameter, notos.environ - Async functions for I/O operations
- Pydantic schemas for request/response bodies
- No blocking calls in async routes
asyncio.Lock()for shared resource initialization
Frontend (Next.js/React)
- Swiss International Style compliance
rounded-noneeverywhere- Textareas have Enter key handler
- Direct icon imports (not barrel)
next/dynamicfor heavy componentsPromise.all()for independent fetches- Server Actions check auth inside
Security
- No secrets in code
- Input validation on user data
- CORS configured properly
- Auth checks on protected endpoints
Response Pattern
WHEN receiving feedback:
1. READ: Complete feedback without reacting
2. UNDERSTAND: Restate requirement in own words
3. VERIFY: Check against codebase reality
4. EVALUATE: Technically sound for THIS codebase?
5. RESPOND: Technical acknowledgment or reasoned pushback
6. IMPLEMENT: One item at a time, test eachForbidden Responses
- "You're absolutely right!" (performative)
- "Great point!" (performative)
- "Let me implement that now" (before verification)
When to Push Back
- Suggestion breaks existing functionality
- Reviewer lacks full context
- Violates YAGNI (unused feature)
- Technically incorrect for this stack
- Conflicts with architectural decisions
Severity Format
[CRITICAL] file:line - Security, data loss, crash
[ERROR] file:line - Bug, missing validation
[WARNING] file:line - Style, convention
[INFO] file:line - Suggestion, not requiredReferences
- Backend guide:
docs/agent/architecture/backend-guide.md - Coding standards:
docs/agent/coding-standards.md - Style guide:
docs/agent/design/style-guide.md