Prompt file imported from Rho-Lall/rho-lall.github.io (.claude/commands/review.md). Copyright stays with the author.

/review

Name: review
Author: Rho-Lall

Run a multi-perspective code review. Uses the Tester agent role.

Usage

/review
/review {TASK-ID}

Argument: Task ID (optional — if omitted, reviews current branch diff)

Steps

1. Compute Diff

git diff astro...HEAD

(astro is the integration branch all wave branches fork from — see RIPTIDE.md branch model)

If no changes, report "No changes to review" and stop.

2. Load Context

Read .riptide/plans/{task-id}.md (the plan to verify against)
Read .kiro/specs/github-pages-site/tasks.md MODULE_MAP section (boundary rules)
Read .kiro/specs/github-pages-site/design.md (architecture expectations)

3. Review Perspectives

3.1 — Plan Conformance

Does the implementation match the plan's file list?
Are function signatures as specified?
Do tests cover every acceptance criterion?

3.2 — Security

Injection (SQL, NoSQL, command)
Auth bypass (missing middleware, missing role checks)
Data leakage (cross-tenant access, exposed secrets)

3.3 — Performance

N+1 queries
Unbounded operations (no LIMIT, no pagination)
Missing caching for expensive computations

3.4 — Module Isolation

No imports outside the tasks.md MODULE_MAP boundaries
No writes to files owned by other waves

4. Update Status

Update .riptide/status.json — set the task's status to "reviewing" and agent to "tester".

5. Write Findings

Append findings to .riptide/plans/{task-id}.md under a #### Review section:

#### Review

**Critical** (must fix before merge)
- {finding with file:line reference}

**High** (should fix before merge)
- {finding with file:line reference}

**Medium** (fix if time allows)
- {finding with file:line reference}

**Low** (nice to have)
- {finding with file:line reference}

Gate

Any Critical finding → block merge
High/Medium/Low only → review passes

Rules

Be specific — include file paths and line numbers.
Don't nitpick style. Focus on correctness, security, and performance.
If no issues found, write "#### Review\n\nNo issues found." and pass.

# /review Run a multi-perspective code review. Uses the **Tester** agent role. ## Usage ``` /review /review {TASK-ID} ``` **Argument:** Task ID (optional — if omitted, reviews current branch diff) ## Steps ### 1. Compute Diff ```bash git diff astro...HEAD ``` (`astro` is the integration branch all wave branches fork from — see RIPTIDE.md branch model) If no changes, report "No changes to review" and stop. ### 2. Load Context 1. Read `.riptide/plans/{task-id}.md` (the plan to verify against) 2. Read `.kiro/specs/github-pages-site/tasks.md` MODULE_MAP section (boundary rules) 3. Read `.kiro/specs/github-pages-site/design.md` (architecture expectations) ### 3. Review Perspectives #### 3.1 — Plan Conformance - Does the implementation match the plan's file list? - Are function signatures as specified? - Do tests cover every acceptance criterion? #### 3.2 — Security - Injection (SQL, NoSQL, command) - Auth bypass (missing middleware, missing role checks) - Data leakage (cross-tenant access, exposed secrets) #### 3.3 — Performance - N+1 queries - Unbounded operations (no LIMIT, no pagination) - Missing caching for expensive computations #### 3.4 — Module Isolation - No imports outside the tasks.md MODULE_MAP boundaries - No writes to files owned by other waves ### 4. Update Status Update `.riptide/status.json` — set the task's status to `"reviewing"` and agent to `"tester"`. ### 5. Write Findings Append findings to `.riptide/plans/{task-id}.md` under a `#### Review` section: ```markdown #### Review **Critical** (must fix before merge) - {finding with file:line reference} **High** (should fix before merge) - {finding with file:line reference} **Medium** (fix if time allows) - {finding with file:line reference} **Low** (nice to have) - {finding with file:line reference} ``` ## Gate - Any **Critical** finding → block merge - High/Medium/Low only → review passes ## Rules - Be specific — include file paths and line numbers. - Don't nitpick style. Focus on correctness, security, and performance. - If no issues found, write "#### Review\n\nNo issues found." and pass.

{ "prompt": "# /review\n\nRun a multi-perspective code review. Uses the **Tester** agent role.\n\n## Usage\n\n```\n/review\n/review {TASK-ID}\n```\n\n**Argument:** Task ID (optional — if omitted, reviews current branch diff)\n\n## Steps\n\n### 1. Compute Diff\n\n```bash\ngit diff astro...HEAD\n```\n\n(`astro` is the integration branch all wave branches fork from — see RIPTIDE.md branch model)\n\nIf no changes, report \"No changes to review\" and stop.\n\n### 2. Load Context\n\n1. Read `.riptide/plans/{task-id}.md` (the plan to verify against)\n2. Read `.kiro/specs/github-pages-site/tasks.md` MODULE_MAP section (boundary rules)\n3. Read `.kiro/specs/github-pages-site/design.md` (architecture expectations)\n\n### 3. Review Perspectives\n\n#### 3.1 — Plan Conformance\n- Does the implementation match the plan's file list?\n- Are function signatures as specified?\n- Do tests cover every acceptance criterion?\n\n#### 3.2 — Security\n- Injection (SQL, NoSQL, command)\n- Auth bypass (missing middleware, missing role checks)\n- Data leakage (cross-tenant access, exposed secrets)\n\n#### 3.3 — Performance\n- N+1 queries\n- Unbounded operations (no LIMIT, no pagination)\n- Missing caching for expensive computations\n\n#### 3.4 — Module Isolation\n- No imports outside the tasks.md MODULE_MAP boundaries\n- No writes to files owned by other waves\n\n### 4. Update Status\n\nUpdate `.riptide/status.json` — set the task's status to `\"reviewing\"` and agent to `\"tester\"`.\n\n### 5. Write Findings\n\nAppend findings to `.riptide/plans/{task-id}.md` under a `#### Review` section:\n\n```markdown\n#### Review\n\n**Critical** (must fix before merge)\n- {finding with file:line reference}\n\n**High** (should fix before merge)\n- {finding with file:line reference}\n\n**Medium** (fix if time allows)\n- {finding with file:line reference}\n\n**Low** (nice to have)\n- {finding with file:line reference}\n```\n\n## Gate\n\n- Any **Critical** finding → block merge\n- High/Medium/Low only → review passes\n\n## Rules\n\n- Be specific — include file paths and line numbers.\n- Don't nitpick style. Focus on correctness, security, and performance.\n- If no issues found, write \"#### Review\\n\\nNo issues found.\" and pass.", "variables": [], "notes": "Multi-perspective code review — plan conformance, security, performance, isolation", "metadata": { "source": { "provider": "github-claude-commands", "repository": "https://github.com/Rho-Lall/rho-lall.github.io", "path": ".claude/commands/review.md", "ref": "d12922df1776f999d8157118995ca74683ef5f2f", "url": "https://github.com/Rho-Lall/rho-lall.github.io/blob/d12922df1776f999d8157118995ca74683ef5f2f/.claude/commands/review.md", "key": "Rho-Lall/rho-lall.github.io/.claude/commands/review.md" } } }

review

About