275 lines
5.1 KiB
Markdown
275 lines
5.1 KiB
Markdown
# Pull Request Review: [PR Title]
|
|
|
|
**PR**: [org/repo#number]
|
|
**Author**: [author]
|
|
**Reviewed**: [date]
|
|
**Reviewers**: Claude Code PR Review
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Executive Summary
|
|
|
|
[1-3 sentence summary of the PR and overall assessment]
|
|
|
|
**Recommendation**: [Approve / Request Changes / Needs Discussion]
|
|
|
|
**Statistics**:
|
|
- Files changed: [count]
|
|
- Lines added: [+count]
|
|
- Lines removed: [-count]
|
|
- Commits: [count]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Unaddressed Comments
|
|
|
|
[If there are unaddressed review comments from other reviewers, list them here with context]
|
|
|
|
### Comment from [reviewer] on [file:line]
|
|
> [Quote the comment]
|
|
|
|
**Status**: Unaddressed - [No response / No code changes / Needs clarification]
|
|
|
|
[Repeat for each unaddressed comment]
|
|
|
|
[If no unaddressed comments: "No unaddressed comments from other reviewers."]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Critical Findings
|
|
|
|
[Issues that MUST be fixed before merge]
|
|
|
|
### [Title of Issue]
|
|
**Location**: `[file:line]`
|
|
**Severity**: Critical
|
|
|
|
**Issue**:
|
|
[Clear description of what's wrong]
|
|
|
|
**Impact**:
|
|
[Why this is critical - security risk, data loss, breaking change, etc.]
|
|
|
|
**Recommendation**:
|
|
[How to fix it - be specific]
|
|
|
|
**Example**:
|
|
```[language]
|
|
[Show problematic code if helpful]
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
[Repeat for each critical finding]
|
|
|
|
[If no critical findings: "No critical issues found."]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## High Priority Findings
|
|
|
|
[Significant issues that should be fixed before merge]
|
|
|
|
### [Title of Issue]
|
|
**Location**: `[file:line]`
|
|
**Severity**: High
|
|
|
|
**Issue**:
|
|
[What's wrong]
|
|
|
|
**Impact**:
|
|
[Why this matters]
|
|
|
|
**Recommendation**:
|
|
[How to fix it]
|
|
|
|
[Repeat for each high priority finding]
|
|
|
|
[If no high priority findings: "No high priority issues found."]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Medium Priority Findings
|
|
|
|
[Issues that should be addressed but don't block merge]
|
|
|
|
### [Title of Issue]
|
|
**Location**: `[file:line]`
|
|
**Severity**: Medium
|
|
|
|
**Issue**:
|
|
[What could be improved]
|
|
|
|
**Impact**:
|
|
[Why this matters for code quality/maintainability]
|
|
|
|
**Recommendation**:
|
|
[Suggested improvements]
|
|
|
|
[Repeat for each medium finding]
|
|
|
|
[If no medium findings: "No medium priority issues found."]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Low Priority Findings
|
|
|
|
[Suggestions and minor improvements]
|
|
|
|
### [Title of Issue]
|
|
**Location**: `[file:line]`
|
|
**Severity**: Low
|
|
|
|
**Suggestion**:
|
|
[Optional improvement or style suggestion]
|
|
|
|
[Can group multiple low-severity items together]
|
|
|
|
[If no low findings: "No low priority suggestions."]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Positive Observations
|
|
|
|
[Highlight what's done well - this is important for constructive reviews!]
|
|
|
|
- [Something done well]
|
|
- [Good pattern or approach]
|
|
- [Excellent test coverage]
|
|
- [Clear documentation]
|
|
- [etc.]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Testing Assessment
|
|
|
|
**Test Coverage**: [Excellent / Good / Adequate / Insufficient / None]
|
|
|
|
**Findings**:
|
|
- [Assessment of test quality and coverage]
|
|
- [Are tests sufficient for the changes?]
|
|
- [Edge cases covered?]
|
|
- [Test quality adequate?]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Documentation Assessment
|
|
|
|
**Documentation**: [Complete / Adequate / Incomplete / None]
|
|
|
|
**Findings**:
|
|
- [Are docs updated for user-facing changes?]
|
|
- [API documentation adequate?]
|
|
- [Code comments where needed?]
|
|
- [Breaking changes documented?]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Backward Compatibility Assessment
|
|
|
|
**Compatibility**: [Fully Compatible / Compatible with Deprecation / Breaking Changes]
|
|
|
|
**Findings**:
|
|
- [API changes analysis]
|
|
- [Database migration safety]
|
|
- [Configuration compatibility]
|
|
- [Deprecation handling]
|
|
|
|
[If breaking changes:]
|
|
**Breaking Changes**:
|
|
- [List each breaking change]
|
|
- [Justification for breaking change]
|
|
- [Migration path provided?]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Performance Considerations
|
|
|
|
**Performance Impact**: [Positive / Neutral / Negative / Needs Investigation]
|
|
|
|
**Findings**:
|
|
- [Any performance improvements or regressions]
|
|
- [Algorithm efficiency]
|
|
- [Database query optimization]
|
|
- [Resource usage]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Security Assessment
|
|
|
|
**Security**: [No Issues / Minor Concerns / Significant Issues]
|
|
|
|
**Findings**:
|
|
- [Input validation adequate?]
|
|
- [Authentication/authorization correct?]
|
|
- [No exposed secrets?]
|
|
- [Dependencies safe?]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Detailed Review Notes
|
|
|
|
[Optional section for additional context, questions, or detailed analysis]
|
|
|
|
### [File Name]
|
|
|
|
[Detailed notes about specific files if needed]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Questions for Author
|
|
|
|
[Any clarifying questions about the implementation]
|
|
|
|
1. [Question about design choice]
|
|
2. [Question about edge case handling]
|
|
3. [etc.]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Follow-up Items
|
|
|
|
[Issues that could be addressed in follow-up PRs]
|
|
|
|
- [ ] [Follow-up item 1]
|
|
- [ ] [Follow-up item 2]
|
|
- [ ] [etc.]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Final Recommendation
|
|
|
|
**Decision**: [Approve / Request Changes / Needs Discussion]
|
|
|
|
**Rationale**:
|
|
[Explain the recommendation based on findings]
|
|
|
|
**Next Steps**:
|
|
[What should happen next - fixes needed, discussion required, etc.]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Appendix
|
|
|
|
### Review Checklist Applied
|
|
|
|
[Optional: Note which checklist areas were reviewed]
|
|
|
|
- [x] Code Quality
|
|
- [x] Correctness
|
|
- [x] Testing
|
|
- [x] Security
|
|
- [x] Performance
|
|
- [x] Backward Compatibility
|
|
- [x] Documentation
|
|
|
|
### Files Reviewed
|
|
|
|
[List of all files examined during review]
|
|
|
|
- `[file path]`
|
|
- `[file path]`
|
|
- ...
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
*This review was conducted using the PR Review skill for Claude Code. For questions or to customize review criteria, edit the skill in `.claude/skills/pr-review/`.*
|