ros/agentic-coding-starter-kit
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/leonvanzyl/agentic-coding-starter-kit.git synced 2026-01-30 06:22:02 +00:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
Files
1bdc9bc92cda7bb890ca94d1eaaf13cfaf785076
agentic-coding-starter-kit/create-agentic-app/template/.claude/commands/review-pr.md
Auto 1bdc9bc92c Update dependencies
2026-01-29 08:51:28 +02:00

2.1 KiB
Raw Blame History

description
description
Review pull requests

Pull request(s): $ARGUMENTS

  • If no PR numbers are provided, ask the user to provide PR number(s).
  • At least 1 PR is required.

TASKS

  1. Retrieve PR Details

    • Use the GH CLI tool to retrieve the details (descriptions, diffs, comments, feedback, reviews, etc)

  2. Assess PR Complexity

    After retrieving PR details, assess complexity based on:

    • Number of files changed
    • Lines added/removed
    • Number of contributors/commits
    • Whether changes touch core/architectural files

    Complexity Tiers

    Simple (no deep dive agents needed):

    • ≤5 files changed AND ≤100 lines changed AND single author
    • Review directly without spawning agents

    Medium (1-2 deep dive agents):

    • 6-15 files changed, OR 100-500 lines, OR 2 contributors
    • Spawn 1 agent for focused areas, 2 if changes span multiple domains

    Complex (up to 3 deep dive agents):

    • 15 files, OR >500 lines, OR >2 contributors, OR touches core architecture

    • Spawn up to 3 agents to analyze different aspects (e.g., security, performance, architecture)

  3. Analyze Codebase Impact

    • Based on the complexity tier determined above, spawn the appropriate number of deep dive subagents
    • For Simple PRs: analyze directly without spawning agents
    • For Medium PRs: spawn 1-2 agents focusing on the most impacted areas
    • For Complex PRs: spawn up to 3 agents to cover security, performance, and architectural concerns

  4. Vision Alignment Check

    • Read the project's README.md and CLAUDE.md to understand the application's core purpose
    • Assess whether this PR aligns with the application's intended functionality
    • If the changes deviate significantly from the core vision or add functionality that doesn't serve the application's purpose, note this in the review
    • This is not a blocker, but should be flagged for the reviewer's consideration

  5. Safety Assessment

    • Provide a review on whether the PR is safe to merge as-is
    • Provide any feedback in terms of risk level

  6. Improvements

    • Propose any improvements in terms of importance and complexity