82 lines
3.7 KiB
Markdown
82 lines
3.7 KiB
Markdown
You are tasked with obtaining external review of a document.
|
|
|
|
Follow these specific steps:
|
|
|
|
1. **Check if arguments were provided**:
|
|
- If the user provided a reference to a specific document to be removed, skip the default message below.
|
|
|
|
2. **If no arguments were provided**, respond with:
|
|
|
|
Use the AskUserQuestion tool to present these options:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
What document would you like me to review?
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
For Options, present at most 2 documents: prioritize documents you created in the current session (most recent first), then fall back to the most recent documents in the `working-notes/` directory.
|
|
|
|
3. **Check for the external review command environment variable**
|
|
|
|
Look for the environment variable `CLAUDE_EXTERNAL_REVIEW_COMMAND`. If that variable exists, move to the next step. If it does not exist, give the user the following prompt:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
To use this slash command you must set up the terminal command to use for external review and store it as the environment variable `CLAUDE_EXTERNAL_REVIEW_COMMAND`. This command should include everything other than the prompt that is needed to access another model.
|
|
|
|
For example, if you want to use opencode to obtain the external review, you could use something like:
|
|
|
|
"opencode --model github-copilot/gpt-5 run"
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
4. **Obtain external review of the document**
|
|
|
|
Invoke the provided external review command by appending the following prompt to the command in the following form:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
${CLAUDE_EXTERNAL_REVIEW_COMMAND} "Review the document at
|
|
RELEVANT_DOC_PATH and
|
|
provide detailed feedback. Evaluate:
|
|
|
|
1. Technical accuracy and completeness of the implementation approach
|
|
2. Alignment with project standards (check project documentation like CLAUDE.md,
|
|
package.json, configuration files, and existing patterns)
|
|
3. Missing technical considerations (error handling, rollback procedures, monitoring,
|
|
security)
|
|
4. Missing behavioral considerations (user experience, edge cases, backward
|
|
compatibility)
|
|
5. Missing strategic considerations (deployment strategy, maintenance burden,
|
|
alternative timing)
|
|
6. Conflicts with established patterns in the codebase
|
|
7. Risk analysis completeness
|
|
8. Testing strategy thoroughness
|
|
|
|
Be specific about what's missing or incorrect. Cite file paths and line numbers where
|
|
relevant. Focus on actionable improvements that would reduce implementation risk."
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Feel free to tweak the prompt to be more applicable to this document and codebase.
|
|
|
|
5. **Critically analyze the external review feedback**
|
|
|
|
Apply a skeptical lens to the feedback received from the external review. Your job is to identify which feedback items are truly critical and actionable. Consider:
|
|
|
|
- Is this feedback technically sound?
|
|
- Does this feedback identify real risks or just theoretical concerns?
|
|
- Would implementing this feedback provide meaningful value, or is it unnecessary complexity?
|
|
- Does this feedback align with the project's constraints and priorities?
|
|
- Is the feedback making assumptions?
|
|
|
|
Dismiss feedback that doesn't meet a high bar for quality and relevance. It's possible that none of the feedback is valuable - if that's the case, clearly state that and explain why.
|
|
|
|
6. **Present summary to the user**
|
|
|
|
Provide a concise summary of the external review feedback with your recommendations. For each significant piece of feedback, include:
|
|
|
|
- **Summary**: Brief description of the feedback point
|
|
- **Recommended action**: One of:
|
|
- **Implement**: Critical feedback that should be addressed
|
|
- **Consider**: Potentially valuable feedback worth discussing with the user
|
|
- **Discard**: Feedback that is not valuable or applicable
|
|
- **Reasoning**: Clear explanation for your recommendation
|
|
|
|
Format your response to be scannable and actionable. Group similar feedback items together where appropriate.
|