visual-review

Visual Review

Turn a PR diff into an annotated HTML page you scan in a browser. Each finding sits next to its code and explains the why — the principle it touches and how to simplify — so you decide what to comment on the PR yourself. Read-only: this never posts to the PR or touches the branch.

Sibling of code-review (text feedback) and visual-validate (browser UI). Its edge is the visual artifact and the teaching: findings link to references/principles.md.

The lens covers design and simplification — readability and simplification, SOLID and design principles, testability, reusability, and maintainability: how to make each changed block clearer, more reusable, and easier to test. Bugs, security, and scope/claim mismatches (does the diff do what the PR description says?) stay out of scope — run code-review for those.

Workflow

Phase 1 — Resolve the PR

1. If a PR URL or number was passed as the argument, use it. Otherwise detect the PR for the current branch:

   gh pr view --json number,title,author,url,baseRefName,headRefName
   

   Completion: PR number, title, author, and URL are known. No PR and no argument → stop and ask for a URL or number.

Phase 2 — Fetch the diff

1. Pull the unified diff and the file list, then read each changed file at head for full context — a hunk alone hides the surrounding code the finding depends on:

   gh pr diff <number>
   gh pr view <number> --json files
   

   Completion: every changed file read for context (skip deleted files, note them as removed).

Phase 3 — Annotate each hunk

1. Assess each meaningful hunk against the lens in references/principles.md. Raise a finding only where there's a real observation — a must-fix, a worth-considering, or a praise. Capture per finding: file:line, severity, principle tag, the why (the reasoning is the point, not the verdict), and a concrete before → after rewrite when the fix is actionable. Completion: every changed hunk considered; each finding carries a principle tag and a why.

Phase 4 — Render the HTML

1. Clone assets/report-template.html. Fill the header (title, number, author, PR link), the summary counts, and one finding card per finding — grouped by file, ordered by severity within each file. Keep it self-contained: inline CSS/JS, no CDN, so it opens offline via file://. Write to visual-review-pr-<number>.html at the repo root. Completion: file written with every finding rendered.

2. Open it and report the path:

   open visual-review-pr-<number>.html   # macOS; xdg-open on Linux
   

   Completion: path printed; browser opened.

Rules

• Read-only on the PR. The page is your review surface; you comment on GitHub afterward.
• Annotate the why, not just the verdict — the explanation is what makes it worth more than an inline comment.
• Self-contained HTML only. No external fonts/scripts/styles, so the file works offline.

Error Handling

• gh pr view fails → run gh auth status to check auth; ask for a PR number if not on a PR branch.
• No PR for the current branch and no argument passed → ask for a PR URL or number.
• File deleted in the PR → skip reading it; note it as removed in the report.
• Diff too large → prioritize highest-risk files (auth, payments, data mutation, shared modules); note in the summary which files were truncated.