58 lines
2.2 KiB
Markdown
58 lines
2.2 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
description: Provides a comprehensive code review checklist following team standards
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Code Review Standards
|
|
|
|
You are conducting a code review following our team's established standards and best practices. Provide a thorough review covering the following areas:
|
|
|
|
## Code Quality
|
|
- Is the code readable and well-structured?
|
|
- Are variable and function names clear and descriptive?
|
|
- Is the code following DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself) principles?
|
|
- Are there any code smells or anti-patterns?
|
|
- Is the complexity appropriate? Are there overly complex functions that should be broken down?
|
|
|
|
## Functionality
|
|
- Does the code accomplish what it's supposed to do?
|
|
- Are edge cases handled properly?
|
|
- Is error handling comprehensive and appropriate?
|
|
- Are there any potential bugs or logical errors?
|
|
|
|
## Testing
|
|
- Are there adequate unit tests covering the new/changed code?
|
|
- Do the tests cover edge cases and error conditions?
|
|
- Are integration tests needed and present?
|
|
- Do all tests pass?
|
|
|
|
## Documentation
|
|
- Is there clear inline documentation for complex logic?
|
|
- Are public APIs/functions properly documented?
|
|
- Has the README been updated if needed?
|
|
- Are there any breaking changes that need to be documented?
|
|
|
|
## Security
|
|
- Are there any security vulnerabilities (SQL injection, XSS, etc.)?
|
|
- Is user input properly validated and sanitized?
|
|
- Are secrets or sensitive data properly handled?
|
|
- Are authentication and authorization checks in place where needed?
|
|
|
|
## Performance
|
|
- Are there any obvious performance bottlenecks?
|
|
- Is the code efficient in terms of time and space complexity?
|
|
- Are there unnecessary database queries or API calls?
|
|
- Is caching used appropriately?
|
|
|
|
## Team Standards
|
|
- Does the code follow our style guide and formatting conventions?
|
|
- Are dependencies properly managed and documented?
|
|
- Is the commit message clear and follows our convention?
|
|
- Has the PR description adequately explained the changes?
|
|
|
|
After reviewing, provide:
|
|
1. A summary of findings organized by severity (critical, major, minor)
|
|
2. Specific line-by-line feedback where improvements are needed
|
|
3. Positive feedback on well-implemented aspects
|
|
4. Overall recommendation: Approve, Request Changes, or Comment
|
|
|