Initial commit

.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+{
+  "name": "pr-reviewer",
+  "description": "Reviews pull request changes to provide feedback, check for issues, and suggest improvements before merging into the main codebase.",
+  "version": "1.0.0",
+  "author": {
+    "name": "ClaudeForge Community",
+    "url": "https://github.com/claudeforge/marketplace"
+  },
+  "commands": [
+    "./commands"
+  ]
+}

README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+# pr-reviewer
+
+Reviews pull request changes to provide feedback, check for issues, and suggest improvements before merging into the main codebase.

commands/pr-review.md

@@ -0,0 +1,344 @@
+---
+description: Review pull requests for code quality, security, bugs, and best practices
+version: 1.0.0
+---
+
+# PR Reviewer
+
+Comprehensive pull request review covering code quality, security, testing, and best practices.
+
+## What It Does
+
+- Analyzes PR changes for code quality issues
+- Identifies potential bugs and edge cases
+- Checks security vulnerabilities
+- Verifies test coverage
+- Suggests improvements and optimizations
+- Reviews documentation and naming
+
+## How to Use
+
+Provide the PR number to review:
+
+```bash
+/pr-review 789
+```
+
+The command will analyze the PR and provide detailed feedback.
+
+## Review Areas
+
+**Code Quality**
+- Code structure and organization
+- Naming conventions
+- Error handling
+- Code duplication
+
+**Functionality**
+- Logic correctness
+- Edge case handling
+- Error conditions
+- Performance implications
+
+**Security**
+- Input validation
+- SQL injection risks
+- XSS vulnerabilities
+- Authentication/authorization
+
+**Testing**
+- Test coverage
+- Test quality
+- Missing test cases
+- Integration tests
+
+**Documentation**
+- Code comments
+- API documentation
+- README updates
+- Inline explanations
+
+## Example Review
+
+**PR #789**: "Add user search feature"
+
+**Code Quality Issues**
+```javascript
+// Issue: Missing null check
+function searchUsers(query) {
+  return users.filter(u => u.name.includes(query));
+  // Problem: Crashes if query or u.name is null
+}
+
+// Suggestion:
+function searchUsers(query) {
+  if (!query) return [];
+  return users.filter(u => u.name?.includes(query));
+}
+```
+
+**Security Concerns**
+```javascript
+// Issue: SQL injection risk
+const query = `SELECT * FROM users WHERE name = '${input}'`;
+
+// Suggestion: Use parameterized queries
+const query = 'SELECT * FROM users WHERE name = ?';
+db.execute(query, [input]);
+```
+
+**Missing Tests**
+```javascript
+// Needs tests for:
+- Empty search query
+- Special characters in query
+- Case sensitivity
+- No results found
+- Null/undefined inputs
+```
+
+## Use Cases
+
+- **Pre-Merge Review**: Catch issues before merging to main
+- **Learning Tool**: Help team improve code quality
+- **Security Audit**: Identify security vulnerabilities
+- **Best Practices**: Ensure code follows standards
+- **Knowledge Sharing**: Educate on better approaches
+
+## Best Practices
+
+- **Be Constructive**: Suggest improvements, don't just criticize
+- **Explain Why**: Provide reasoning for suggestions
+- **Prioritize Issues**: Mark critical vs nice-to-have changes
+- **Test Suggestions**: Verify suggestions actually work
+- **Link Resources**: Provide docs or examples when helpful
+- **Acknowledge Good Code**: Highlight what's done well
+
+## Review Checklist
+
+**Functionality**
+- [ ] Code does what PR description claims
+- [ ] Edge cases are handled
+- [ ] Error conditions are managed
+- [ ] No obvious bugs
+
+**Code Quality**
+- [ ] Code is readable and maintainable
+- [ ] Functions are focused and single-purpose
+- [ ] No code duplication
+- [ ] Naming is clear and consistent
+
+**Security**
+- [ ] Input is validated
+- [ ] No SQL injection vulnerabilities
+- [ ] No XSS vulnerabilities
+- [ ] Authentication is required where needed
+
+**Testing**
+- [ ] New code has tests
+- [ ] Tests cover edge cases
+- [ ] Tests are meaningful
+- [ ] All tests pass
+
+**Performance**
+- [ ] No obvious performance issues
+- [ ] Database queries are optimized
+- [ ] Large data sets are handled efficiently
+- [ ] No memory leaks
+
+**Documentation**
+- [ ] Complex logic is commented
+- [ ] API changes are documented
+- [ ] README is updated if needed
+- [ ] Breaking changes are noted
+
+## Common Issues
+
+**Missing Error Handling**
+```javascript
+// Bad
+const data = JSON.parse(input);
+
+// Good
+try {
+  const data = JSON.parse(input);
+} catch (error) {
+  console.error('Invalid JSON:', error);
+  return null;
+}
+```
+
+**Unsafe Data Access**
+```javascript
+// Bad
+const email = user.profile.email;
+
+// Good
+const email = user?.profile?.email || 'unknown';
+```
+
+**Inefficient Loops**
+```javascript
+// Bad
+for (let item of items) {
+  await processItem(item);
+}
+
+// Good
+await Promise.all(items.map(item => processItem(item)));
+```
+
+**Hardcoded Values**
+```javascript
+// Bad
+const timeout = 5000;
+
+// Good
+const timeout = config.requestTimeout || 5000;
+```
+
+## Review Comments Format
+
+**Structure**
+```markdown
+**Issue**: Brief description of the problem
+
+**Location**: file.ts:42
+
+**Severity**: Critical | High | Medium | Low
+
+**Suggestion**:
+Specific code or approach to fix the issue
+
+**Reason**:
+Why this is important and what could go wrong
+```
+
+**Example**
+```markdown
+**Issue**: Potential SQL injection vulnerability
+
+**Location**: api/users.ts:23
+
+**Severity**: Critical
+
+**Suggestion**:
+Use parameterized queries instead of string concatenation:
+`db.query('SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = ?', [userId])`
+
+**Reason**:
+Current code allows attackers to inject malicious SQL,
+potentially exposing or deleting all user data.
+```
+
+## Approval Guidelines
+
+**Approve** if:
+- All critical issues are resolved
+- Code meets quality standards
+- Tests are comprehensive
+- No security concerns
+
+**Request Changes** if:
+- Critical bugs exist
+- Security vulnerabilities present
+- Missing essential tests
+- Code quality issues
+
+**Comment** if:
+- Minor improvements suggested
+- Questions need clarification
+- Architecture discussion needed
+
+## Testing Review
+
+Verify tests are:
+
+**Comprehensive**
+```javascript
+// Good test coverage
+describe('searchUsers', () => {
+  test('returns matching users', () => { ... });
+  test('handles empty query', () => { ... });
+  test('is case insensitive', () => { ... });
+  test('returns empty array for no matches', () => { ... });
+});
+```
+
+**Meaningful**
+```javascript
+// Good test
+expect(result.length).toBe(2);
+expect(result[0].name).toBe('Alice');
+
+// Bad test
+expect(result).toBeTruthy(); // Too vague
+```
+
+## Performance Review
+
+Check for:
+
+**Database Efficiency**
+- Are queries optimized?
+- Are indexes being used?
+- Is there an N+1 query problem?
+
+**Algorithm Efficiency**
+- Could a better algorithm be used?
+- Is time complexity acceptable?
+- Are there unnecessary iterations?
+
+**Resource Usage**
+- Are large objects being copied unnecessarily?
+- Is memory being freed properly?
+- Are files/connections closed?
+
+## Documentation Review
+
+Ensure:
+- Complex logic has comments explaining why
+- Public APIs have JSDoc or similar
+- Breaking changes are documented
+- Migration guides exist if needed
+
+## Feedback Examples
+
+**Positive Feedback**
+```
+Great job handling edge cases in the validation logic!
+The error messages are clear and helpful to users.
+```
+
+**Constructive Feedback**
+```
+Consider extracting this logic into a separate function
+to improve readability and make it easier to test.
+```
+
+**Question**
+```
+How does this handle the case when the user is not
+authenticated? Should we add a check here?
+```
+
+## Troubleshooting
+
+**Too Many Issues**: Focus on critical ones first
+
+**Unclear Changes**: Ask PR author for clarification
+
+**Disagreement**: Discuss reasoning, consider team standards
+
+**Time Constraints**: Do quick pass for critical issues only
+
+## Quality Standards
+
+A thorough review includes:
+- All code changes examined
+- Security implications considered
+- Test coverage verified
+- Documentation checked
+- Performance assessed
+- Clear, actionable feedback
+- Specific code suggestions where applicable

plugin.lock.json

@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
+{
+  "$schema": "internal://schemas/plugin.lock.v1.json",
+  "pluginId": "gh:claudeforge/marketplace:plugins/commands/pr-reviewer",
+  "normalized": {
+    "repo": null,
+    "ref": "refs/tags/v20251128.0",
+    "commit": "78ef17742516bc4819720a07c15c7743a59e8f57",
+    "treeHash": "9eb00ae2f07e4dd64f364b7f29ab80005375f47b2ada18ff0bb7218720698b40",
+    "generatedAt": "2025-11-28T10:15:35.446912Z",
+    "toolVersion": "publish_plugins.py@0.2.0"
+  },
+  "origin": {
+    "remote": "git@github.com:zhongweili/42plugin-data.git",
+    "branch": "master",
+    "commit": "aa1497ed0949fd50e99e70d6324a29c5b34f9390",
+    "repoRoot": "/Users/zhongweili/projects/openmind/42plugin-data"
+  },
+  "manifest": {
+    "name": "pr-reviewer",
+    "description": "Reviews pull request changes to provide feedback, check for issues, and suggest improvements before merging into the main codebase.",
+    "version": "1.0.0"
+  },
+  "content": {
+    "files": [
+      {
+        "path": "README.md",
+        "sha256": "dacf266ca6b21f9befe5c256b4b06664e026c66636694ae5abb9d8b5420a4bf1"
+      },
+      {
+        "path": ".claude-plugin/plugin.json",
+        "sha256": "29469c52344bcf5fb7c2edddebe54c534746945f4aeb5395cc13616f3c0a2714"
+      },
+      {
+        "path": "commands/pr-review.md",
+        "sha256": "307d5c801ff44c0bb618d42486f59d81c62b5fc85d9d8df6b109feb0befe260f"
+      }
+    ],
+    "dirSha256": "9eb00ae2f07e4dd64f364b7f29ab80005375f47b2ada18ff0bb7218720698b40"
+  },
+  "security": {
+    "scannedAt": null,
+    "scannerVersion": null,
+    "flags": []
+  }
+}