86797abb99
Skill that sends git diffs to an independent AI model (Gemini CLI, Ollama) for security, bug, performance, and convention review. Assembles a context packet from CLAUDE.md + session notes + expanded diff so the reviewer evaluates intent vs. implementation. Includes context assembler script, structured review prompt template, and review-ready CLAUDE.md with key patterns documented.
142 lines
4.4 KiB
Markdown
142 lines
4.4 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: a-review
|
|
description: >
|
|
Run an independent AI code review after coding sessions. Sends the git diff,
|
|
CLAUDE.md, and session notes to a second model (Gemini CLI, Ollama, or any
|
|
text-in/text-out backend) for security, bug, performance, and convention
|
|
review. Use this skill after completing code changes, after zero-check passes,
|
|
when the user asks for a review, or when you want a second opinion on code
|
|
quality. Also triggers on "review my changes", "get a second opinion",
|
|
"run a-review", or "check this with gemini/ollama".
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# a-review — Agent Code Review
|
|
|
|
Send code changes to an independent AI for review. The reviewer gets project
|
|
context (architecture, conventions, intent) alongside the diff so it can
|
|
evaluate what was done against what was intended.
|
|
|
|
This is not a linter or SAST tool — that's what zero-check does. This is a
|
|
subjective second opinion from a different model: "did you miss something
|
|
a linter wouldn't catch?"
|
|
|
|
## When to Run
|
|
|
|
- After a coding session with substantive changes
|
|
- After zero-check passes (review complements validation)
|
|
- When the user asks for a review or second opinion
|
|
- Before committing changes to a shared branch
|
|
|
|
Do not run on trivial changes (typo fixes, comment edits, formatting-only).
|
|
|
|
## Workflow
|
|
|
|
### Step 1: Collect the diff
|
|
|
|
```bash
|
|
# Default: changes since last commit
|
|
git diff HEAD~1
|
|
|
|
# Or staged changes if nothing committed yet
|
|
git diff --cached
|
|
|
|
# Expanded context for reviewer (10 lines surrounding each change)
|
|
git diff -U10 HEAD~1
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Use `HEAD~1` by default. If the user says "review staged changes" or
|
|
there are no commits yet, use `--cached`.
|
|
|
|
### Step 2: Assemble the context packet
|
|
|
|
The reviewer needs four things:
|
|
|
|
1. **CLAUDE.md** — read from the project root. This gives the reviewer
|
|
the architecture, key patterns, and conventions to review against.
|
|
If CLAUDE.md doesn't exist, skip this and note it in the output.
|
|
|
|
2. **Session notes** — read the latest session entry from
|
|
`sessions/<project-slug>.md`. This tells the reviewer what was
|
|
intended, so it can compare intent vs. implementation.
|
|
If no session notes exist, skip this.
|
|
|
|
3. **Expanded diff** — `git diff -U10 HEAD~1` so the reviewer sees
|
|
each change in its surrounding context (the function it lives in,
|
|
the class it belongs to).
|
|
|
|
4. **Diff stat** — `git diff --stat HEAD~1` for a quick summary of
|
|
what files changed and how much.
|
|
|
|
Run the assembler script to combine these:
|
|
|
|
```bash
|
|
python scripts/assemble_context.py
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
This reads the project, builds the context packet, and prints it to
|
|
stdout. Pipe it to the reviewer.
|
|
|
|
### Step 3: Send to the reviewer
|
|
|
|
Check for a `.a-review.yml` config file in the project root. If it
|
|
exists, use the configured backend. If not, default to Gemini CLI.
|
|
|
|
**Gemini CLI:**
|
|
```bash
|
|
python scripts/assemble_context.py | \
|
|
GEMINI_CLI_TRUST_WORKSPACE=true \
|
|
gemini -p "$(cat references/review-prompt.md)" \
|
|
--approval-mode plan
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
**Ollama:**
|
|
```bash
|
|
CONTEXT=$(python scripts/assemble_context.py)
|
|
curl -s http://localhost:11434/api/generate \
|
|
-d "{\"model\": \"codellama\", \"prompt\": \"$(cat references/review-prompt.md)\n\n$CONTEXT\", \"stream\": false}" \
|
|
| jq -r '.response'
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
The `--approval-mode plan` flag for Gemini is important — it keeps
|
|
the reviewer in read-only mode so it can't modify files.
|
|
|
|
### Step 4: Save the output
|
|
|
|
Save the review to `reviews/a-review-YYYY-MM-DD.md` in the project.
|
|
Create the `reviews/` directory if it doesn't exist.
|
|
|
|
If a review already exists for today, suffix with `-2`, `-3`, etc.
|
|
|
|
Add a header to the saved file:
|
|
|
|
```markdown
|
|
# a-review — YYYY-MM-DD
|
|
|
|
**Model:** <model name/version>
|
|
**Diff:** HEAD~1 (N files, M lines changed)
|
|
**Context:** CLAUDE.md + session notes included
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
<reviewer output here>
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Step 5: Surface findings
|
|
|
|
Read the saved review and summarize the findings for the user. Group
|
|
by severity if the reviewer used severity labels. Highlight anything
|
|
marked critical or security-related.
|
|
|
|
If the reviewer found actionable issues, offer to fix them.
|
|
|
|
## Reference Files
|
|
|
|
| File | Purpose |
|
|
|------|---------|
|
|
| `references/review-prompt.md` | The prompt template sent to the reviewer |
|
|
| `scripts/assemble_context.py` | Builds the context packet from project files |
|
|
|
|
Load `references/review-prompt.md` when building the review command.
|
|
Load `scripts/assemble_context.py` when you need to understand or
|
|
modify the context assembly logic.
|