- Introduced a new command `/workflow:review-session-cycle` for session-based code reviews across 7 dimensions. - Implemented hybrid parallel-iterative execution to enhance review efficiency and coverage. - Added detailed documentation outlining command usage, execution flow, and agent roles. - Configured specialized dimensions with priority-based allocation and defined severity assessment criteria. - Established a robust aggregation logic for identifying cross-cutting concerns and critical findings. - Enabled real-time progress tracking through an interactive HTML dashboard. - Included mechanisms for deep-dive analysis and remediation planning for critical issues.
30 KiB
name, description, argument-hint, allowed-tools
| name | description | argument-hint | allowed-tools |
|---|---|---|---|
| review-module-cycle | Independent multi-dimensional code review for specified modules/files. Analyzes specific code paths across 7 dimensions with hybrid parallel-iterative execution, independent of workflow sessions. | <path-pattern> [--dimensions=security,architecture,...] [--max-iterations=N] [--output-dir=path] [--resume] | SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*), Task(*) |
Workflow Review-Module-Cycle Command
Quick Start
# Review specific module (all 7 dimensions)
/workflow:review-module-cycle src/auth/**
# Review multiple modules
/workflow:review-module-cycle src/auth/**,src/payment/**
# Review with custom dimensions
/workflow:review-module-cycle src/payment/** --dimensions=security,architecture,quality
# Review specific files
/workflow:review-module-cycle src/payment/processor.ts,src/payment/validator.ts
# Custom output directory
/workflow:review-module-cycle src/auth/** --output-dir=.workflow/.scratchpad/reviews/auth-review
# Resume interrupted review
/workflow:review-module-cycle --resume
Review Scope: Specified modules/files only (independent of git history or sessions) Default Dimensions: Security, Architecture, Quality, Action-Items, Performance, Maintainability, Best-Practices Max Iterations: 3 (default, adjustable) CLI Tools: Gemini → Qwen → Codex (fallback chain)
What & Why
Core Concept
Independent multi-dimensional code review orchestrator with hybrid parallel-iterative execution for comprehensive quality assessment of specific modules or files.
Review Scope:
- Module-based: Reviews specified file patterns (e.g.,
src/auth/**,*.ts) - No session dependency: Works independently of workflow sessions
- For session-based review: Use
/workflow:review-session-cyclecommand instead
vs Session Review:
- Session Review (
review-session-cycle): Reviews git changes within a workflow session - Module Review (
review-module-cycle): Reviews any specified code paths, regardless of git history
Value Proposition
- Ad-hoc Review: Review any code without requiring a workflow session
- Module-focused: Target specific areas of codebase for deep analysis
- Comprehensive Coverage: Same 7 specialized dimensions as session review
- Intelligent Prioritization: Automatic identification of critical issues and cross-cutting concerns
- Real-time Visibility: JSON-based progress tracking with interactive HTML dashboard
Orchestrator Boundary (CRITICAL)
- ONLY command for independent multi-dimensional module review
- Manages: dimension coordination, aggregation, iteration control, progress tracking
- Delegates: Code exploration and analysis to @cli-explore-agent, dimension-specific reviews via Deep Scan mode
How It Works
Execution Flow (Simplified)
1. Discovery & Initialization
└─ Resolve file patterns, validate paths, initialize state, create output structure → Generate dashboard.html
2. Phase 2: Parallel Reviews (for each dimension):
├─ Launch 7 review agents simultaneously
├─ Each executes CLI analysis via Gemini/Qwen on specified files
├─ Generate dimension JSON + markdown reports
└─ Update review-progress.json
3. Phase 3: Aggregation:
├─ Load all dimension JSON files
├─ Calculate severity distribution (critical/high/medium/low)
├─ Identify cross-cutting concerns (files in 3+ dimensions)
└─ Decision:
├─ Critical findings OR high > 5 OR critical files → Phase 4 (Iterate)
└─ Else → Phase 5 (Complete)
4. Phase 4: Iterative Deep-Dive (optional):
├─ Select critical findings (max 5 per iteration)
├─ Launch deep-dive agents for root cause analysis
├─ Generate remediation plans with impact assessment
├─ Re-assess severity based on analysis
└─ Loop until no critical findings OR max iterations
5. Phase 5: Completion
└─ Generate REVIEW-SUMMARY.md → Output path
Agent Roles
| Agent | Responsibility |
|---|---|
| Orchestrator | Phase control, path resolution, state management, aggregation logic, iteration control |
| @cli-explore-agent (Review) | Execute dimension-specific code analysis via Deep Scan mode, generate findings JSON with dual-source strategy (Bash + Gemini), create structured analysis reports |
| @cli-explore-agent (Deep-dive) | Focused root cause analysis using dependency mapping, remediation planning with architectural insights, impact assessment, severity re-assessment |
Enhanced Features
1. Review Dimensions Configuration
7 Specialized Dimensions with priority-based allocation:
| Dimension | Template | Priority | Timeout |
|---|---|---|---|
| Security | 03-assess-security-risks.txt | 1 (Critical) | 60min |
| Architecture | 02-review-architecture.txt | 2 (High) | 60min |
| Quality | 02-review-code-quality.txt | 3 (Medium) | 40min |
| Action-Items | 02-analyze-code-patterns.txt | 2 (High) | 40min |
| Performance | 03-analyze-performance.txt | 3 (Medium) | 60min |
| Maintainability | 02-review-code-quality.txt* | 3 (Medium) | 40min |
| Best-Practices | 03-review-quality-standards.txt | 3 (Medium) | 40min |
*Custom focus: "Assess technical debt and maintainability"
Category Definitions by Dimension:
const CATEGORIES = {
security: ['injection', 'authentication', 'authorization', 'encryption', 'input-validation', 'access-control', 'data-exposure'],
architecture: ['coupling', 'cohesion', 'layering', 'dependency', 'pattern-violation', 'scalability', 'separation-of-concerns'],
quality: ['code-smell', 'duplication', 'complexity', 'naming', 'error-handling', 'testability', 'readability'],
'action-items': ['requirement-coverage', 'acceptance-criteria', 'documentation', 'deployment-readiness', 'missing-functionality'],
performance: ['n-plus-one', 'inefficient-query', 'memory-leak', 'blocking-operation', 'caching', 'resource-usage'],
maintainability: ['technical-debt', 'magic-number', 'long-method', 'large-class', 'dead-code', 'commented-code'],
'best-practices': ['convention-violation', 'anti-pattern', 'deprecated-api', 'missing-validation', 'inconsistent-style']
};
2. Path Pattern Resolution
Supported Patterns:
- Glob patterns:
src/auth/**,src/payment/**/*.ts - Specific files:
src/payment/processor.ts - Multiple patterns:
src/auth/**,src/payment/**(comma-separated) - Extension filters:
*.ts,**/*.test.ts
Resolution Process:
- Parse input pattern (comma-separated if multiple)
- Expand glob patterns to file list
- Validate all files exist
- Store resolved file list in review-state.json
3. Aggregation Logic
Cross-Cutting Concern Detection:
- Files appearing in 3+ dimensions = Critical Files
- Same issue pattern across dimensions = Systemic Issue
- Severity clustering in specific files = Hotspots
Deep-Dive Selection Criteria:
- All critical severity findings (priority 1)
- Top 3 high-severity findings in critical files (priority 2)
- Max 5 findings per iteration (prevent overwhelm)
4. Severity Assessment
Severity Levels:
- Critical: Security vulnerabilities, data corruption risks, system-wide failures, authentication/authorization bypass
- High: Feature degradation, performance bottlenecks, architecture violations, significant technical debt
- Medium: Code smells, minor performance issues, style inconsistencies, maintainability concerns
- Low: Documentation gaps, minor refactoring opportunities, cosmetic issues
Iteration Trigger:
- Critical findings > 0 OR
- High findings > 5 OR
- Critical files count > 0
Core Responsibilities
Orchestrator
Phase 1: Discovery & Initialization
- Path resolution: Parse and expand file patterns (glob support)
- Validation: Ensure all specified files exist and are readable
- State initialization: Create review-state.json with dimensions, max_iterations, resolved_files
- Directory structure: Create output-dir/{dimensions,iterations,reports}/
- Dashboard generation: Generate dashboard.html from template (see Dashboard Generation below)
- TodoWrite initialization: Set up progress tracking
Phase 2: Parallel Review Coordination
- Launch 7 @cli-explore-agent instances simultaneously (Deep Scan mode)
- Pass dimension-specific context (template, timeout, custom focus, target files)
- Monitor completion via review-progress.json updates
- TodoWrite updates: Mark dimensions as completed
- CLI tool fallback: Gemini → Qwen → Codex (on error/timeout)
Phase 3: Aggregation
- Load all dimension JSON files from dimensions/
- Calculate severity distribution: Count by critical/high/medium/low
- Identify cross-cutting concerns: Files in 3+ dimensions
- Select deep-dive findings: Critical + high in critical files (max 5)
- Decision logic: Iterate if critical > 0 OR high > 5 OR critical files exist
- Update review-state.json with aggregation results
Phase 4: Iteration Control
- Check iteration count < max_iterations (default 3)
- Launch deep-dive agents for selected findings
- Collect remediation plans and re-assessed severities
- Update severity distribution based on re-assessments
- Record iteration in review-state.json
- Loop back to aggregation if still have critical/high findings
Phase 5: Completion
- Generate REVIEW-SUMMARY.md with all findings and statistics
- Update review-state.json with completion_time and phase=complete
- TodoWrite completion: Mark all tasks done
- Output: Dashboard path and REVIEW-SUMMARY.md path to user
Review Agent (@cli-explore-agent)
Analysis Mode: Deep Scan (Phase 1: Bash structural + Phase 2: Gemini semantic + Phase 3: Synthesis)
Context Provided by Orchestrator:
{
dimension: "security|architecture|quality|...",
review_type: "module",
target_files: ["src/auth/service.ts", "src/auth/validator.ts", ...],
output_paths: {
json: "{output-dir}/dimensions/{dimension}.json",
report: "{output-dir}/reports/{dimension}-analysis.md",
cli_output: "{output-dir}/reports/{dimension}-cli-output.txt"
},
cli_config: {
tool: "gemini",
template: "~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/analysis/xxx.txt",
timeout: 3600000,
mode: "analysis"
}
}
Deliverables:
- Dimension JSON with findings array (see JSON Schema below)
- Analysis markdown report with summary and recommendations
- CLI output log for debugging
Deep-Dive Agent (@cli-explore-agent)
Analysis Mode: Dependency Map + Deep Scan (for root cause analysis with architectural context)
Context Provided:
{
finding_id: "uuid",
original_finding: {...},
iteration: 1,
output_paths: {
json: "{output-dir}/iterations/iteration-1-finding-{uuid}.json",
report: "{output-dir}/reports/deep-dive-1-{uuid}.md"
},
cli_config: {
tool: "gemini",
template: "01-diagnose-bug-root-cause.txt",
timeout: 2400000
}
}
Deliverables:
- Deep-dive JSON with root cause, remediation plan, impact assessment
- Analysis report with detailed recommendations
Dashboard Generation
Mechanism
Dashboard uses static HTML + JSON polling: reads template from ~/.claude/templates/review-cycle-dashboard.html, replaces placeholders, writes to output directory. Dashboard polls review-progress.json every 5 seconds for real-time updates, then loads all dimension JSON files when phase=complete.
CRITICAL: Dashboard MUST be generated in Phase 1 to enable real-time progress monitoring throughout execution.
Phase 1 Steps
-
Read & Process Template
const template = Read('~/.claude/templates/review-cycle-dashboard.html'); const dashboard = template .replace('{{SESSION_ID}}', `Module: ${pathPattern}`) .replace('{{REVIEW_TYPE}}', 'module'); Write(`${outputDir}/dashboard.html`, dashboard); -
Auto-open in Browser (optional)
Bash(`start ${dashboardPath}`); // Windows Bash(`open ${dashboardPath}`); // macOS Bash(`xdg-open ${dashboardPath}`); // Linux -
Output Path to User
📊 Dashboard: file://${absolutePath}/dashboard.html 🔄 Monitor progress in real-time (auto-refresh every 5s)
Features Summary
- Real-time Progress: Phase indicator, progress bar, agent status (auto-refresh 5s)
- Interactive Findings: Severity/dimension filtering, search, sort, detail drawer
- Export: Generate markdown report
- Dark Mode: Toggle with localStorage persistence
Usage Details: See ~/.claude/workflows/DASHBOARD-QUICKSTART.md
Reference
CLI Tool Configuration
Fallback Chain: Gemini → Qwen → Codex (same as test-cycle-execute)
Tool Details:
- Gemini (primary):
gemini-2.5-pro- 60min timeout - Qwen (fallback):
coder-model- 60min timeout - Codex (fallback):
gpt-5.1-codex- 60min timeout
When to Fallback: HTTP 429, timeout, invalid JSON output, confidence < 0.4
Output File Structure
{output-dir}/
├── review-state.json # Orchestrator state machine
├── review-progress.json # Real-time progress for dashboard
├── dimensions/ # Per-dimension results
│ ├── security.json
│ ├── architecture.json
│ ├── quality.json
│ ├── action-items.json
│ ├── performance.json
│ ├── maintainability.json
│ └── best-practices.json
├── iterations/ # Deep-dive results
│ ├── iteration-1-finding-{uuid}.json
│ └── iteration-2-finding-{uuid}.json
├── reports/ # Human-readable reports
│ ├── security-analysis.md
│ ├── security-cli-output.txt
│ ├── deep-dive-1-{uuid}.md
│ └── ...
├── REVIEW-SUMMARY.md # Final summary
└── dashboard.html # Interactive dashboard
Review State JSON
Purpose: Persisted state machine for phase transitions and iteration control - enables Resume
{
"review_id": "review-20250125-143022",
"review_type": "module",
"target_pattern": "src/auth/**",
"resolved_files": [
"src/auth/service.ts",
"src/auth/validator.ts",
"src/auth/middleware.ts"
],
"phase": "parallel|aggregate|iterate|complete",
"current_iteration": 1,
"max_iterations": 3,
"dimensions_reviewed": ["security", "architecture", "quality", "action-items", "performance", "maintainability", "best-practices"],
"selected_strategy": "comprehensive",
"next_action": "execute_parallel_reviews|aggregate_findings|execute_deep_dive|generate_final_report|complete",
"severity_distribution": {
"critical": 2,
"high": 5,
"medium": 12,
"low": 8
},
"critical_files": [...],
"iterations": [...],
"completion_criteria": {...}
}
Review Progress JSON
Purpose: Real-time dashboard updates via polling
{
"review_id": "review-20250125-143022",
"last_update": "2025-01-25T14:35:10Z",
"phase": "parallel|aggregate|iterate|complete",
"current_iteration": 1,
"progress": {
"parallel_review": {
"total_dimensions": 7,
"completed": 5,
"in_progress": 2,
"percent_complete": 71
},
"deep_dive": {
"total_findings": 6,
"analyzed": 2,
"in_progress": 1,
"percent_complete": 33
}
},
"agent_status": [
{
"agent_type": "review-agent",
"dimension": "security",
"status": "completed",
"started_at": "2025-01-25T14:30:00Z",
"completed_at": "2025-01-25T15:15:00Z",
"duration_ms": 2700000
},
{
"agent_type": "deep-dive-agent",
"finding_id": "sec-001-uuid",
"status": "in_progress",
"started_at": "2025-01-25T14:32:00Z"
}
],
"estimated_completion": "2025-01-25T16:00:00Z"
}
Agent Output Schemas
Agent-produced JSON files follow standardized schemas:
-
Dimension Results (cli-explore-agent output from parallel reviews)
- Schema:
~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/review-dimension-results-schema.json - Output:
{output-dir}/dimensions/{dimension}.json - Contains: findings array, summary statistics, cross_references
- Schema:
-
Deep-Dive Results (cli-explore-agent output from iterations)
- Schema:
~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/review-deep-dive-results-schema.json - Output:
{output-dir}/iterations/iteration-{N}-finding-{uuid}.json - Contains: root_cause, remediation_plan, impact_assessment, reassessed_severity
- Schema:
Agent Invocation Template
Review Agent (parallel execution, 7 instances):
Task(
subagent_type="cli-explore-agent",
description=`Execute ${dimension} review analysis via Deep Scan`,
prompt=`
## Task Objective
Conduct comprehensive ${dimension} code exploration and analysis using Deep Scan mode (Bash + Gemini dual-source strategy) for specified module files
## Analysis Mode Selection
Use **Deep Scan mode** for this review:
- Phase 1: Bash structural scan for standard patterns (classes, functions, imports)
- Phase 2: Gemini semantic analysis for design intent, non-standard patterns, ${dimension}-specific concerns
- Phase 3: Synthesis with attribution (bash-discovered vs gemini-discovered findings)
## MANDATORY FIRST STEPS
1. Read review state: ${reviewStateJsonPath}
2. Get target files: Read resolved_files from review-state.json
3. Validate file access: bash(ls -la ${targetFiles.join(' ')})
## Review Context
- Review Type: module (independent)
- Review Dimension: ${dimension}
- Review ID: ${reviewId}
- Target Pattern: ${targetPattern}
- Resolved Files: ${resolvedFiles.length} files
- Output Directory: ${outputDir}
## CLI Configuration
- Tool Priority: gemini → qwen → codex (fallback chain)
- Template: ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/analysis/${dimensionTemplate}
- Custom Focus: ${customFocus || 'Standard dimension analysis'}
- Timeout: ${timeout}ms
- Mode: analysis (READ-ONLY)
- Context Pattern: ${targetFiles.map(f => `@${f}`).join(' ')}
## Expected Deliverables
1. Dimension Results JSON: ${outputDir}/dimensions/${dimension}.json
- MUST follow schema: ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/review-dimension-results-schema.json
- MUST include: findings array with severity, file, line, description, recommendation
- MUST include: summary statistics (total findings, severity distribution)
- MUST include: cross_references to related findings
2. Analysis Report: ${outputDir}/reports/${dimension}-analysis.md
- Human-readable summary with recommendations
- Grouped by severity: critical → high → medium → low
- Include file:line references for all findings
3. CLI Output Log: ${outputDir}/reports/${dimension}-cli-output.txt
- Raw CLI tool output for debugging
- Include full analysis text
## Dimension-Specific Guidance
${getDimensionGuidance(dimension)}
## Success Criteria
- All target files analyzed for ${dimension} concerns
- All findings include file:line references with code snippets
- Severity assessment follows established criteria (see reference)
- Recommendations are actionable with code examples
- JSON output is valid and follows schema exactly
- Report is comprehensive and well-organized
`
)
Deep-Dive Agent (iteration execution):
Task(
subagent_type="cli-explore-agent",
description=`Deep-dive analysis for critical finding: ${findingTitle} via Dependency Map + Deep Scan`,
prompt=`
## Task Objective
Perform focused root cause analysis using Dependency Map mode (for impact analysis) + Deep Scan mode (for semantic understanding) to generate comprehensive remediation plan for critical ${dimension} issue
## Analysis Mode Selection
Use **Dependency Map mode** first to understand dependencies:
- Build dependency graph around ${file} to identify affected components
- Detect circular dependencies or tight coupling related to this finding
- Calculate change risk scores for remediation impact
Then apply **Deep Scan mode** for semantic analysis:
- Understand design intent and architectural context
- Identify non-standard patterns or implicit dependencies
- Extract remediation insights from code structure
## Finding Context
- Finding ID: ${findingId}
- Original Dimension: ${dimension}
- Title: ${findingTitle}
- File: ${file}:${line}
- Severity: ${severity}
- Category: ${category}
- Original Description: ${description}
- Iteration: ${iteration}
## MANDATORY FIRST STEPS
1. Read original finding: ${dimensionJsonPath}
2. Read affected file: ${file}
3. Identify related code: bash(grep -r "import.*${basename(file)}" ${projectDir}/src --include="*.ts")
4. Read test files: bash(find ${projectDir}/tests -name "*${basename(file, '.ts')}*" -type f)
## CLI Configuration
- Tool Priority: gemini → qwen → codex
- Template: ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/analysis/01-diagnose-bug-root-cause.txt
- Timeout: 2400000ms (40 minutes)
- Mode: analysis (READ-ONLY)
## Expected Deliverables
1. Deep-Dive Results JSON: ${outputDir}/iterations/iteration-${iteration}-finding-${findingId}.json
- MUST follow schema: ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/review-deep-dive-results-schema.json
- MUST include: root_cause with summary, details, affected_scope, similar_patterns
- MUST include: remediation_plan with approach, steps[], estimated_effort, risk_level
- MUST include: impact_assessment with files_affected, tests_required, breaking_changes
- MUST include: reassessed_severity with severity_change_reason
- MUST include: confidence_score (0.0-1.0)
2. Analysis Report: ${outputDir}/reports/deep-dive-${iteration}-${findingId}.md
- Detailed root cause analysis
- Step-by-step remediation plan
- Impact assessment and rollback strategy
## Success Criteria
- Root cause clearly identified with supporting evidence
- Remediation plan is step-by-step actionable with exact file:line references
- Each step includes specific commands and validation tests
- Impact fully assessed (files, tests, breaking changes, dependencies)
- Severity re-evaluation justified with evidence
- Confidence score accurately reflects certainty of analysis
- References include project-specific and external documentation
`
)
Dimension Guidance Reference
function getDimensionGuidance(dimension) {
const guidance = {
security: `
Focus Areas:
- Input validation and sanitization
- Authentication and authorization mechanisms
- Data encryption (at-rest and in-transit)
- SQL/NoSQL injection vulnerabilities
- XSS, CSRF, and other web vulnerabilities
- Sensitive data exposure
- Access control and privilege escalation
Severity Criteria:
- Critical: Authentication bypass, SQL injection, RCE, sensitive data exposure
- High: Missing authorization checks, weak encryption, exposed secrets
- Medium: Missing input validation, insecure defaults, weak password policies
- Low: Security headers missing, verbose error messages, outdated dependencies
`,
architecture: `
Focus Areas:
- Layering and separation of concerns
- Coupling and cohesion
- Design pattern adherence
- Dependency management
- Scalability and extensibility
- Module boundaries
- API design consistency
Severity Criteria:
- Critical: Circular dependencies, god objects, tight coupling across layers
- High: Violated architectural principles, scalability bottlenecks
- Medium: Missing abstractions, inconsistent patterns, suboptimal design
- Low: Minor coupling issues, documentation gaps, naming inconsistencies
`,
quality: `
Focus Areas:
- Code duplication
- Complexity (cyclomatic, cognitive)
- Naming conventions
- Error handling patterns
- Code readability
- Comment quality
- Dead code
Severity Criteria:
- Critical: Severe complexity (CC > 20), massive duplication (>50 lines)
- High: High complexity (CC > 10), significant duplication, poor error handling
- Medium: Moderate complexity (CC > 5), naming issues, code smells
- Low: Minor duplication, documentation gaps, cosmetic issues
`,
'action-items': `
Focus Areas:
- Requirements coverage verification
- Acceptance criteria met
- Documentation completeness
- Deployment readiness
- Missing functionality
- Test coverage gaps
- Configuration management
Severity Criteria:
- Critical: Core requirements not met, deployment blockers
- High: Significant functionality missing, acceptance criteria not met
- Medium: Minor requirements gaps, documentation incomplete
- Low: Nice-to-have features missing, minor documentation gaps
`,
performance: `
Focus Areas:
- N+1 query problems
- Inefficient algorithms (O(n²) where O(n log n) possible)
- Memory leaks
- Blocking operations on main thread
- Missing caching opportunities
- Resource usage (CPU, memory, network)
- Database query optimization
Severity Criteria:
- Critical: Memory leaks, O(n²) in hot path, blocking main thread
- High: N+1 queries, missing indexes, inefficient algorithms
- Medium: Suboptimal caching, unnecessary computations, lazy loading issues
- Low: Minor optimization opportunities, redundant operations
`,
maintainability: `
Focus Areas:
- Technical debt indicators
- Magic numbers and hardcoded values
- Long methods (>50 lines)
- Large classes (>500 lines)
- Dead code and commented code
- Code documentation
- Test coverage
Severity Criteria:
- Critical: Massive methods (>200 lines), severe technical debt blocking changes
- High: Large methods (>100 lines), significant dead code, undocumented complex logic
- Medium: Magic numbers, moderate technical debt, missing tests
- Low: Minor refactoring opportunities, cosmetic improvements
`,
'best-practices': `
Focus Areas:
- Framework conventions adherence
- Language idioms
- Anti-patterns
- Deprecated API usage
- Coding standards compliance
- Error handling patterns
- Logging and monitoring
Severity Criteria:
- Critical: Severe anti-patterns, deprecated APIs with security risks
- High: Major convention violations, poor error handling, missing logging
- Medium: Minor anti-patterns, style inconsistencies, suboptimal patterns
- Low: Cosmetic style issues, minor convention deviations
`
};
return guidance[dimension] || 'Standard code review analysis';
}
Completion Conditions
Full Success:
- All dimensions reviewed
- Critical findings = 0
- High findings ≤ 5
- Action: Generate final report, mark phase=complete
Partial Success:
- All dimensions reviewed
- Max iterations reached
- Still have critical/high findings
- Action: Generate report with warnings, recommend follow-up
Resume Capability:
- Read review-state.json on startup
- Check phase and next_action
- Resume from current phase (parallel/aggregate/iterate)
- Preserve iteration history
Error Handling
| Scenario | Action |
|---|---|
| Invalid path pattern | Error: Provide valid glob pattern or file path |
| No files matched | Error: Pattern matched 0 files, check path |
| Files not readable | Error: Permission denied for specified files |
| CLI analysis failure | Fallback: Gemini → Qwen → Codex → degraded mode |
| Invalid JSON output | Retry with clarified prompt, fallback to next tool |
| Max iterations reached | Generate report with remaining issues, mark partial success |
| Agent timeout | Log timeout, continue with available results |
| Missing dimension file | Skip in aggregation, log warning |
CLI Fallback Triggers (same as test-cycle-execute):
- Invalid JSON output (parse error, missing required fields)
- Low confidence score < 0.4
- HTTP 429, 5xx errors, timeouts
- Analysis too brief (< 100 words in report)
TodoWrite Structure
TodoWrite({
todos: [
{
content: "Phase 1: Discovery & Initialization",
status: "completed",
activeForm: "Completed discovery & initialization"
},
{
content: "Phase 2: Parallel Reviews (7 dimensions)",
status: "in_progress",
activeForm: "Executing parallel reviews"
},
{
content: " → Security review (src/auth/**)",
status: "completed",
activeForm: "Analyzing security"
},
{
content: " → Architecture review (src/auth/**)",
status: "completed",
activeForm: "Analyzing architecture"
},
// ... (same pattern as review-session-cycle)
]
});
Best Practices
- Start Specific: Begin with focused module patterns for faster results
- Expand Gradually: Add more modules based on initial findings
- Use Glob Wisely:
src/auth/**is more efficient thansrc/**with lots of irrelevant files - Trust Aggregation Logic: Auto-selection based on proven heuristics
- Monitor Logs: Check reports/ directory for CLI analysis insights
- Dashboard Polling: Refresh every 5 seconds for real-time updates
- Resume Support: Interrupted reviews can resume from last checkpoint
- Export Results: Use dashboard export for external tracking tools
Examples
Review Authentication Module
/workflow:review-module-cycle src/auth/**
Review Payment Processing with Security Focus
/workflow:review-module-cycle src/payment/** --dimensions=security,architecture
Review Multiple Modules
/workflow:review-module-cycle src/auth/**,src/payment/**,src/user/**
Review Specific Critical Files
/workflow:review-module-cycle src/payment/processor.ts,src/auth/validator.ts --max-iterations=5