oduffy-delphi/requesting-code-review

Requesting Code Review

Use /review-dispatch to route to named reviewers (Patrik, Palí, Sid, Camelia, Fru) to catch issues before they cascade.

Core principle: Review early, review often.

When to Request Review

Mandatory:

<!-- Review: Patrik — ghost reference to deleted workflow -->

• After each task in /delegate-execution workflow
• After completing major feature
• Before merge to main

Optional but valuable:

• When stuck (fresh perspective)
• Before refactoring (baseline check)
• After fixing complex bug

How to Request

1. Get git SHAs:

BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1)  # or origin/main
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

2. Dispatch code-reviewer subagent:

Use /review-dispatch to route to the appropriate named reviewer. Fill the context template at code-reviewer.md to provide the review scope.

Placeholders:

• {WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED} - What you just built
• {PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS} - What it should do
• {BASE_SHA} - Starting commit
• {HEAD_SHA} - Ending commit
• {DESCRIPTION} - Brief summary

3. Act on ALL feedback:

• Go through the review line-by-line — every item, every severity
• Fix Critical, Important, AND Minor issues before proceeding
• The only reasons to skip an item: (a) it requires PM input, or (b) you genuinely disagree (flag to PM with reasoning)
• Do NOT "note for later" — later never comes
• If the review has many items, use a checklist to track completion

Example

[Just completed Task 2: Add verification function]

You: Let me request code review before proceeding.

BASE_SHA=$(git log --oneline | grep "Task 1" | head -1 | awk '{print $1}')
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

[Invoke /review-dispatch — routes to named reviewer based on artifact signals]
  WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED: Verification and repair functions for conversation index
  PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from docs/plans/deployment-plan.md
  BASE_SHA: a7981ec
  HEAD_SHA: 3df7661
  DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types

[Subagent returns]:
  Strengths: Clean architecture, real tests
  Issues:
    Important: Missing progress indicators
    Minor: Magic number (100) for reporting interval
  Assessment: Ready to proceed

You: [Fix progress indicators]
[Continue to Task 3]

Integration with Workflows

Delegate-Execution Workflow:

• Review after EACH task
• Catch issues before they compound
• Fix before moving to next task

Executing Plans:

• Review after each batch (3 tasks)
• Get feedback, apply, continue

Ad-Hoc Development:

• Review before merge
• Review when stuck

Red Flags

Never:

• Skip review because "it's simple"
• Ignore ANY review item regardless of severity
• "Note for later" or "defer" minor issues — address them now
• Cherry-pick from a review and declare it "addressed"
• Argue with valid technical feedback

If reviewer wrong:

• Push back with technical reasoning
• Show code/tests that prove it works
• Request clarification

See template at: requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md