pr-review

PR Review

Review all changes between main and the current branch HEAD, plus any staged and unstaged working-tree changes.

Setup

1. Rebase — Unless the user says otherwise, fetch origin and rebase onto origin/main, resolving conflicts. If the branch has Alembic migrations, run alembic heads after rebase — if multiple heads exist, update down_revision to restore a single linear history.

2. Gather context — If a PR exists (gh pr view):

   • PR description, title, review comments (gh pr view --comments)
   • Linked issues (gh issue view N) to understand requirements If no PR exists, review from the diff alone.

1. Read project docs — Check for AGENTS.md, CONTRIBUTING.md, CLAUDE.md. These are authoritative for test commands, linter config, and conventions — use their commands exactly, not generic substitutes.

Review checklist

Review the diff in priority order. Fix blocking issues directly when straightforward; flag issues that need human judgment.

#	Category	Severity	Focus
1	Security	Blocking	Injection, leaked secrets, auth gaps, OWASP top 10
2	Correctness	Blocking	Logic errors, edge cases, mismatch with linked issues
3	Test coverage	Blocking	100% differential coverage — verify changed code has tests
4	Linter compliance	Blocking	Run project linters on touched files; resolve all findings
5	Performance	High	N+1 queries, unnecessary allocations, bottlenecks
6	Code quality	Medium	Redundancy, over-complexity, code smells
7	Consistency	Medium	Follow documented conventions; suggest undocumented ones
8	Alembic migrations	Conditional	Idempotence, reversibility, cross-DB compat, data safety, batch_alter_table for SQLite

Second opinions

After your own review, run available second-opinion tools in parallel as background tasks. If a tool is missing from $PATH or fails, skip it and note reduced coverage.

• Codex: codex exec review --base origin/main
• Bob: Pipe the diff inline — git diff origin/main..HEAD | bob "Review this diff for correctness, security, and code quality. Be specific about line-level issues." Tailor the prompt to the PR content.

Attribute findings to their source (Claude/Codex/Bob) and resolve contradictions.

Output format

# PR Review: [branch-name]

## Summary
[1-2 sentence overview: what changed, whether it meets PR/issue goals]

## Findings
| # | Severity | Category | File:Line | Issue | Source |
|---|----------|----------|-----------|-------|--------|

## Fixes Applied
[Issues fixed directly, with commit refs]

## Remaining Issues
[Issues needing human decision or outside scope]

## Recommendation
- [ ] Ready to merge
- [ ] Ready after fixing remaining issues
- [ ] Needs significant rework

Rules

• Never mention Claude, Claude Code, or AI in commits or PR text.
• Never push unless explicitly asked.
• Sign commits with git commit -s. Verify Git author matches gh auth status.
• Create new commits rather than amending existing ones when rebasing or fixing.
• After fix-up commits, re-run linters and tests to confirm no regressions.