iomgaa
6bdb802f01
- Add all claude skills (brainstorming, commit, debugging, TDD, etc.) - Add claude hooks (pre-commit-guard, post-edit-quality) - Add research templates (experiment plan, research brief, etc.) - Add claude tools (arxiv/semantic_scholar/openalex fetch, wiki, exa) - Add TRM4 reference implementation as algorithm fidelity baseline - Add research-wiki content (plans, index, graph, query_pack) - Update .gitignore to exclude .graphify_version runtime state
3.6 KiB
name, description
| name | description |
|---|---|
| requesting-code-review | Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements |
Requesting Code Review
Dispatch Codex as a read-only reviewer to catch issues before they cascade. The reviewer gets precisely crafted context for evaluation — never your session's history. This keeps the reviewer focused on the work product, not your thought process, and preserves your own context for continued work.
Core principle: Review early, review often.
When to Request Review
Mandatory:
- After each task in subagent-driven development
- After completing major feature
- Before merge to main
Optional but valuable:
- When stuck (fresh perspective)
- Before refactoring (baseline check)
- After fixing complex bug
How to Request
1. Get git SHAs:
BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1) # or origin/main
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
2. Dispatch Codex as reviewer:
用 /codex:rescue --fresh --wait 把 code-reviewer.md 模板（含 {BASE_SHA}/{HEAD_SHA} 占位与 git diff 指令）交 Codex 只读审查。
Placeholders:
{DESCRIPTION}- Brief summary of what you built{PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS}- What it should do{BASE_SHA}- Starting commit{HEAD_SHA}- Ending commit
3. Act on feedback:
- 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 Codex as reviewer via /codex:rescue --fresh --wait]
DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types
PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from research-wiki/plans/deployment-plan.md
BASE_SHA: a7981ec
HEAD_SHA: 3df7661
[Codex 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
Subagent-Driven Development:
- Review after EACH task
- Catch issues before they compound
- Fix before moving to next task
Executing Plans:
- Review after each task or at natural checkpoints
- Get feedback, apply, continue
Ad-Hoc Development:
- Review before merge
- Review when stuck
Red Flags
Never:
- Skip review because "it's simple"
- Ignore Critical issues
- Proceed with unfixed Important issues
- Argue with valid technical feedback
If reviewer wrong:
- Push back with technical reasoning
- Show code/tests that prove it works
- Request clarification
See template at: requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md
Wiki Integration
Precondition: research-wiki/ directory exists (skip this section entirely if it does not).
Trigger: When requesting a code review or when a clear review result has been received.
Type: review
Severity: approved / needs_changes / rejected
Steps:
- Run
.claude/tools/research_wiki.py add_entity research-wiki/ --type review --id <slug> --title "<review title>"to create the review entity - Append the review conclusion, key issues, recommendations, and whether it passed to the generated page
- If the review recommendations change a design or plan, run
.claude/tools/research_wiki.py add_edge research-wiki/ --from "review:<id>" --to "<target-type>:<id>" --type informs --evidence "..." - Run
.claude/tools/research_wiki.py rebuild_index research-wiki/