Skip to content

REVIEW.md

Latest commit

 

History

History
156 lines (102 loc) · 3.65 KB

REVIEW.md

File metadata and controls

156 lines (102 loc) · 3.65 KB
Raw

Code Review Instructions

WHAT TO REVIEW

Flag these (high confidence only):

  • Security vulnerabilities (injection, XSS, auth bypass)
  • Runtime errors (null/undefined access, missing await)
  • Logic bugs (wrong conditions, off-by-one)
  • Typos that cause runtime errors
  • Breaking API changes

Skip these:

  • Style preferences
  • TODO comments
  • console.log statements
  • Generated files (lock files, migration snapshots & journals)
  • Patterns already used elsewhere in the codebase

Database migrations (.sql files - DO review these):

  • Table-locking DDL (CREATE INDEX, ALTER TABLE) on populated tables - flag if not using CONCURRENTLY
  • Adding NOT NULL without a DEFAULT on existing columns
  • Dropping columns/tables that may still be read by running application code
  • Large backfills or data transforms without batching
  • Missing partial index opportunities (e.g. WHERE col IS NOT NULL)

COMMENT FORMAT

**[SEVERITY]:** Brief description

Explanation of the issue.

Severities: CRITICAL (blocks merge), WARNING (should fix), SUGGESTION (nice to have)

Suggestion Blocks (for typos and simple fixes)

For single-line fixes, use GitHub's suggestion syntax.

CRITICAL RULES FOR SUGGESTION BLOCKS:

  1. The suggestion block REPLACES the ENTIRE commented line
  2. Put ONLY the corrected version of that ONE line inside the block
  3. Do NOT include the old/wrong code
  4. Do NOT include multiple lines or surrounding context
  5. Do NOT include both before and after versions

CORRECT Example

If line 42 has a typo: return searchTerm ? ${baseUrl}&name=${searchTem} : baseUrl;

Post this comment on line 42:

**CRITICAL:** Variable name typo - `searchTem` should be `searchTerm`

```suggestion
  return searchTerm ? `${baseUrl}&name=${searchTerm}` : baseUrl;
```

WRONG Examples (do NOT do these)

WRONG - includes both old and new code:

  return searchTerm ? `${baseUrl}&name=${searchTem}` : baseUrl;
  return searchTerm ? `${baseUrl}&name=${searchTerm}` : baseUrl;

WRONG - includes multiple lines/context:

const buildUrl = (searchTerm: string): string => {
  const baseUrl = `${API}/?page=1`;
  return searchTerm ? `${baseUrl}&name=${searchTerm}` : baseUrl;
};

WRONG - shows a diff format:

- return searchTerm ? `${baseUrl}&name=${searchTem}` : baseUrl;
+ return searchTerm ? `${baseUrl}&name=${searchTerm}` : baseUrl;

The suggestion block replaces ONLY the line you commented on. Put ONLY the corrected version of that single line.

Summary Format

Use this EXACT format for the summary comment. ALWAYS start with <!-- kilo-review --> marker.

When Issues Found:

<!-- kilo-review -->

## Code Review Summary

**Status:** X Issues Found | **Recommendation:** Address before merge

### Executive Summary

One concise sentence naming the highest-risk issue and affected area.

### Overview

| Severity   | Count |
| ---------- | ----- |
| CRITICAL   | X     |
| WARNING    | X     |
| SUGGESTION | X     |

<details>
<summary><b>Issue Details (click to expand)</b></summary>

#### CRITICAL

| File          | Line | Issue       |
| ------------- | ---- | ----------- |
| `src/file.ts` | 42   | Description |

</details>

<details>
<summary><b>Files Reviewed (X files)</b></summary>

- `src/file.ts` - X issues

</details>

When No Issues Found:

<!-- kilo-review -->

## Code Review Summary

**Status:** No Issues Found | **Recommendation:** Merge

### Executive Summary

One concise sentence describing the reviewed scope and confidence level.

<details>
<summary><b>Files Reviewed (X files)</b></summary>

- `src/file.ts`
- `src/other.ts`

</details>