Dispatches a specialized code reviewer subagent to evaluate recent git changes against specific requirements, returning structured feedback on critical, important, and minor issues.
Say it in your own words; the assistant finds this recipe by itself. Examples:
Use this skill after completing a major feature, finishing a task in a multi-step development plan, or before merging code to the main branch. It is also appropriate when you are stuck on a complex bug or need a fresh perspective before starting a refactoring.
Dispatch a code reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade. The reviewer gets precisely crafted context for evaluation — never your session's history.
Core principle: Review early, review often.
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
1. Get git SHAs:
BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1) # or: git merge-base origin/main HEAD
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
2. Dispatch code reviewer subagent:
Dispatch a general-purpose subagent, filling the template at code-reviewer.md
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)
[Just completed Task 2: Add verification function]
You: Let me request code review before proceeding.
BASE_SHA=$(git log --oneline | grep "Task 1" | head -1 | cut -d' ' -f1)
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
[Dispatch code reviewer subagent]
DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types
PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from docs/superpowers/plans/deployment-plan.md
BASE_SHA: a7981ec
HEAD_SHA: 3df7661
[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]
| Excuse | Reality |
|---|---|
| "I'll just review the diff myself instead of dispatching a reviewer" | You're the coordinator — reviewing the diff inline burns the context window you need to keep driving the work. Dispatch a reviewer subagent: the diff and the evaluation live in its context, and only the findings come back to you. |
| "The reviewer needs my whole session history to understand the change" | Hand it precisely crafted context, never your session's history. That keeps the reviewer on the work product, not your thought process. |
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: code-reviewer.md
LICENSESKILL.mdcode-reviewer.mdVendored from obra/superpowers, commit b739a8af570e, path skills/requesting-code-review, licence MIT. The upstream licence file ships inside the skill.