<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.)