From b1419baf34bdef57dd7ca31737b4766d58d39018 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Auto Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2026 09:58:59 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Update PR review command --- .claude/commands/review-pr.md | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/.claude/commands/review-pr.md b/.claude/commands/review-pr.md index 9c9098f..027c807 100644 --- a/.claude/commands/review-pr.md +++ b/.claude/commands/review-pr.md @@ -40,15 +40,36 @@ Pull request(s): $ARGUMENTS - 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** +4. **PR Scope & Title Alignment Check** + - Compare the PR title and description against the actual diff content + - Check whether the PR is focused on a single coherent change or contains multiple unrelated changes + - If the title/description describe one thing but the PR contains significantly more (e.g., title says "fix typo in README" but the diff touches 20 files across multiple domains), flag this as a **scope mismatch** + - A scope mismatch is a **merge blocker** — recommend the author split the PR into smaller, focused PRs + - Suggest specific ways to split the PR (e.g., "separate the refactor from the feature addition") + - Reviewing large, unfocused PRs is impractical and error-prone; the review cannot provide adequate assurance for such changes + +5. **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** +6. **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 \ No newline at end of file +7. **Improvements** + - Propose any improvements in terms of importance and complexity + +8. **Merge Recommendation** + - Based on all findings, provide a clear merge/don't-merge recommendation + - If all concerns are minor (cosmetic issues, naming suggestions, small style nits, missing comments, etc.), recommend **merging the PR** and note that the reviewer can address these minor concerns themselves with a quick follow-up commit pushed directly to master + - If there are significant concerns (bugs, security issues, architectural problems, scope mismatch), recommend **not merging** and explain what needs to be resolved first + +9. **TLDR** + - End the review with a `## TLDR` section + - In 3-5 bullet points maximum, summarize: + - What this PR is actually about (one sentence) + - The key concerns, if any (or "no significant concerns") + - **Verdict: MERGE** / **MERGE (with minor follow-up)** / **DON'T MERGE** with a one-line reason + - This section should be scannable in under 10 seconds \ No newline at end of file