Requesting Code Review

When to Request Review

• After each task in subagent-driven development
• After completing major feature
• Before merge to main

• When stuck (fresh perspective)
• Before refactoring (baseline check)
• After fixing complex bug

How to Request

BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1)  # or origin/main
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

code-reviewer.md

• {WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED}

  - What you just built

• {PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS}

  - What it should do

• {BASE_SHA}

  - Starting commit

• {HEAD_SHA}

  - Ending commit

• {DESCRIPTION}

  - Brief summary

• Fix Critical issues immediately
• Fix Important issues before proceeding
• Note Minor issues for later
• Push back if reviewer is wrong (with reasoning)

Example

[Just completed Task 2: Add verification function]

You: Let me request code review before proceeding.

BASE_SHA=$(git log --oneline | grep "Task 1" | head -1 | awk '{print $1}')
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

[Dispatch superpowers:code-reviewer subagent]
  WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED: Verification and repair functions for conversation index
  PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from docs/plans/deployment-plan.md
  BASE_SHA: a7981ec
  HEAD_SHA: 3df7661
  DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types

[Subagent returns]:
  Strengths: Clean architecture, real tests
  Issues:
    Important: Missing progress indicators
    Minor: Magic number (100) for reporting interval
  Assessment: Ready to proceed

You: [Fix progress indicators]
[Continue to Task 3]

Integration with Workflows

• Review after EACH task
• Catch issues before they compound
• Fix before moving to next task

• Review after each batch (3 tasks)
• Get feedback, apply, continue

• Review before merge
• Review when stuck

Red Flags

• Skip review because "it's simple"
• Ignore Critical issues
• Proceed with unfixed Important issues
• Argue with valid technical feedback

• Push back with technical reasoning
• Show code/tests that prove it works
• Request clarification

When to Use