Quick Code Review

Context

• Current branch: !git branch --show-current

• Git status: !git status --porcelain

• Base branch: !(git show-branch | grep '' | grep -v "$(git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD)" | head -1 | sed 's/.[([^]])]./\1/' | sed 's/^.*//' 2>/dev/null) || echo "develop"

• Changes since base: !BASE=$(git merge-base HEAD develop 2>/dev/null || git merge-base HEAD main 2>/dev/null) && git log --oneline $BASE..HEAD

• Files changed since base: !BASE=$(git merge-base HEAD develop 2>/dev/null || git merge-base HEAD main 2>/dev/null) && git diff --name-only $BASE..HEAD

• Test commands available: !([ -f package.json ] && echo "npm/pnpm/yarn test") || ([ -f Cargo.toml ] && echo "cargo test") || ([ -f pyproject.toml ] && echo "pytest/uv run pytest") || ([ -f go.mod ] && echo "go test") || echo "no standard test framework detected"

Phase 1: Determine Review Scope

Goal: Identify what to review based on current state.

Actions:

• Check review scope in this order:

• Uncommitted changes: If git status shows modifications, review those files via git diff

• Session changes: If files were modified during this conversation, review those

• User argument: If $ARGUMENTS specifies files/directories, review those

• No scope: If none of the above, use AskUserQuestion tool to ask user to specify files/directories to review

• Record the determined scope for Phase 2.

Phase 2: Initial Assessment

Goal: Scope the review and determine which specialized agents are required.

Actions:

• Explore changed code context using the Explore agent:

• Launch subagent_type="Explore" with thoroughness: "quick"

• Let the agent autonomously discover related code and dependencies

• Run an initial assessment with @tech-lead-reviewer — architectural impact assessment — to gauge architectural, security, and UX risk.

• Evaluate whether a deeper review is needed based on the tech-lead assessment.

• Identify which specialized agents to involve (minimizing turnaround time).

Phase 3: Targeted Review

Goal: Gather targeted feedback from relevant specialized reviewers.

Actions:

• Launch only the necessary specialized reviews via the Task tool:

• @code-reviewer — logic correctness, tests, error handling.

• @security-reviewer — authentication, data protection, validation.

• @performance-reviewer — performance bottlenecks and resource usage (if performance-sensitive).

• @test-coverage-reviewer — test coverage and quality (if tests are modified or missing).

• @ux-reviewer — usability and accessibility (skip if purely backend/CLI).

• Collect outcomes from each agent.

• Resolve conflicting recommendations between reviewers.

Phase 4: Consolidation & Reporting

Goal: Present findings and optionally implement fixes.

Actions:

• Organize findings using the priority/confidence matrix:

• Priority: Critical → High → Medium → Low

• Confidence: High → Medium → Low

• Present a concise summary to the user.

• Ask whether the user wants fixes implemented.

• If confirmed:

• Apply requested changes.

• Refactor with @code-simplifier — code simplification and optimization.

• Run tests to validate fixes.

• Stage commits following Git commit conventions (see ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/references/git-commit-conventions.md ).

• Report outcomes and confirm review completion.

IMPORTANT: You MUST use the Task tool to complete ALL tasks.