7d43b67bcd
Structured plan review across 4 axes (architecture, code quality, tests, performance) as a reusable custom command with separate rules files. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
33 lines
1.2 KiB
Markdown
33 lines
1.2 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
description: "Code quality review criteria for plan and code reviews"
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Code Quality Review Criteria
|
|
|
|
When reviewing code quality, evaluate these dimensions:
|
|
|
|
## Organization
|
|
- Is the module structure logical and consistent?
|
|
- Are files in the right directories?
|
|
- Is the naming convention consistent across the codebase?
|
|
|
|
## DRY Violations
|
|
- Flag any duplicated logic (be aggressive)
|
|
- Identify copy-paste patterns that should be abstracted
|
|
- Check for repeated configuration or magic values
|
|
|
|
## Error Handling
|
|
- Are errors handled at the right level (not swallowed, not over-caught)?
|
|
- Are edge cases explicitly handled or documented as out-of-scope?
|
|
- Do error messages provide enough context for debugging?
|
|
- Are there silent failures (empty catch blocks, ignored return values)?
|
|
|
|
## Technical Debt
|
|
- Which areas have the highest maintenance burden?
|
|
- Are there TODO/FIXME comments that should be addressed now?
|
|
- Is there dead code that should be removed?
|
|
|
|
## Engineering Balance
|
|
- Are there areas that are over-engineered (premature abstraction, unnecessary complexity)?
|
|
- Are there areas that are under-engineered (fragile, hacky, missing validation)?
|
|
- Does the complexity match the actual requirements?
|