pixelastic/review

Review

Two-axis review of the diff between HEAD and a fixed point the user supplies:

• Standards — does the code conform to this repo's documented coding standards?
• Spec — does the code faithfully implement the originating issue / PRD / spec?

Both axes run as parallel sub-agents so they don't pollute each other's context, then this skill aggregates their findings.

Process

1. Get the diff

Two entry points — pick whichever applies:

Filepath path — if the argument matches the pattern review-diff-<uuid>.md, read that file directly with the Read tool. Do not call review-diff. The file contents are the diff context; continue to step 2.

Natural language path — interpret the user's intent and translate to review-diff args, then run review-diff via the Bash tool. Use its stdout as the diff context.

| User says | review-diff call | |---|---| | Nothing / "review this" / "review WIP" | review-diff (0 args) | | "review this branch" / "review <branch>" | review-diff <branch> | | "review since main" / "review main" | review-diff main | | "review commit abc123" | review-diff abc123 | | "review main..feature" / "review main feature" | review-diff main feature |

2. Identify the spec source

Look for the originating spec, in this order:

1. A path the user passed as an argument.
2. A PRD/spec file under docs/<branchName>.
3. If nothing is found, ask the user where the spec is. If they say there isn't one, the Spec sub-agent will skip and report "no spec available".

3. Identify the standards sources

Anything in the repo that documents how code should be written. Common locations:

• CLAUDE.md
• CONTRIBUTING.md
• CONTEXT.md, CONTEXT-MAP.md, per-context CONTEXT.md files
• Any STYLE.md, STANDARDS.md, STYLEGUIDE.md, or similar at the repo root or under docs/
• docs/adr/ (architectural decisions are standards)
• Local or global {language}-writer skills
• .editorconfig, eslint.config.*, prettier.config.* (machine-enforced standards — note them but don't re-check what tooling already checks)

Collect the list of files. The Standards sub-agent will read them.

4. Spawn both sub-agents in parallel

Send a single message with two Agent tool calls. Use the general-purpose subagent for both.

Standards sub-agent prompt — include:

• The full diff command and commit list.
• The list of standards-source files you found in step 3.
• The brief: "Read the standards docs. Then read the diff. Report — per file/hunk where relevant — every place the diff violates a documented standard. Cite the standard (file + the rule). Distinguish hard violations from judgement calls. Skip anything tooling enforces. Under 400 words."

Spec sub-agent prompt — include:

• The diff command and commit list.
• The path or fetched contents of the spec.
• The brief: "Read the spec. Then read the diff. Report: (a) requirements the spec asked for that are missing or partial; (b) requirements that look implemented but where the implementation looks wrong. Quote the spec line for each finding. Under 400 words."

If the spec is missing, skip the Spec sub-agent and note this in the final report.

5. Aggregate

Present the two reports under ## Standards and ## Spec headings, verbatim or lightly cleaned. Do not merge or rerank findings — the two axes are deliberately separate so the user can see them independently.

End with a one-line summary: total findings per axis, and the worst single issue (if any) flagged.

Why two axes

A change can pass one axis and fail the other:

• Code that follows every standard but implements the wrong thing → Standards pass, Spec fail.
• Code that does exactly what the issue asked but breaks the project's conventions → Spec pass, Standards fail.

Reporting them separately stops one axis from masking the other.