Claude-Code-Workflow/.claude/commands/workflow/review-session-cycle.md

name, description, argument-hint, allowed-tools

name	description	argument-hint	allowed-tools
review-session-cycle	Session-based comprehensive multi-dimensional code review. Analyzes git changes from workflow session across 7 dimensions with hybrid parallel-iterative execution, aggregates findings, and performs focused deep-dives on critical issues until quality gates met.	[session-id] [--dimensions=security,architecture,...] [--max-iterations=N]	SlashCommand(*), TodoWrite(*), Read(*), Bash(*), Task(*)

Workflow Review-Session-Cycle Command

Quick Start

# Execute comprehensive session review (all 7 dimensions)
/workflow:review-session-cycle

# Review specific session with custom dimensions
/workflow:review-session-cycle WFS-payment-integration --dimensions=security,architecture,quality

# Specify session and iteration limit
/workflow:review-session-cycle WFS-payment-integration --max-iterations=5

Review Scope: Git changes from session creation to present (via git log --since) Session Requirement: Requires active or completed workflow session Output Directory: .workflow/active/WFS-{session-id}/.review/ (session-based) Default Dimensions: Security, Architecture, Quality, Action-Items, Performance, Maintainability, Best-Practices Max Iterations: 3 (adjustable via --max-iterations) Default Iterations: 1 (deep-dive runs once; use --max-iterations=0 to skip) CLI Tools: Gemini → Qwen → Codex (fallback chain)

What & Why

Core Concept

Session-based multi-dimensional code review orchestrator with hybrid parallel-iterative execution for comprehensive quality assessment of git changes within a workflow session.

Review Scope:

• Session-based: Reviews only files changed during the workflow session (via git log --since="${sessionCreatedAt}")
• For independent module review: Use /workflow:review-module-cycle command instead

vs Standard Review:

• Standard: Sequential manual reviews → Inconsistent coverage → Missed cross-cutting concerns
• Review-Session-Cycle: Parallel automated analysis → Aggregate findings → Deep-dive critical issues → Comprehensive coverage

Value Proposition

1. Comprehensive Coverage: 7 specialized dimensions analyze all quality aspects simultaneously
2. Intelligent Prioritization: Automatic identification of critical issues and cross-cutting concerns
3. Actionable Insights: Deep-dive iterations provide step-by-step remediation plans

Orchestrator Boundary (CRITICAL)

• ONLY command for comprehensive multi-dimensional 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)

Phase 1: Discovery & Initialization
   └─ Validate session, initialize state, create output structure

Phase 2: Parallel Reviews (for each dimension)
   ├─ Launch 7 review agents simultaneously
   ├─ Each executes CLI analysis via Gemini/Qwen
   ├─ Generate dimension JSON + markdown reports
   └─ Update review-progress.json

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)

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

Phase 5: Completion
   └─ Finalize review-progress.json

Agent Roles

Agent	Responsibility
Orchestrator	Phase control, session discovery, 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. Aggregation Logic

Cross-Cutting Concern Detection:

1. Files appearing in 3+ dimensions = Critical Files
2. Same issue pattern across dimensions = Systemic Issue
3. 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)

3. 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

Step 1: Session Discovery

// If session ID not provided, auto-detect
if (!providedSessionId) {
  // Check for active sessions
  const activeSessions = Glob('.workflow/active/WFS-*');
  if (activeSessions.length === 1) {
    sessionId = activeSessions[0].match(/WFS-[^/]+/)[0];
  } else if (activeSessions.length > 1) {
    // List sessions and prompt user
    error("Multiple active sessions found. Please specify session ID.");
  } else {
    error("No active session found. Create session first with /workflow:session:start");
  }
} else {
  sessionId = providedSessionId;
}

// Validate session exists
Bash(`test -d .workflow/active/${sessionId} && echo "EXISTS"`);

Step 2: Session Validation

• Ensure session has implementation artifacts (check .summaries/ or .task/ directory)
• Extract session creation timestamp from workflow-session.json
• Use timestamp for git log filtering: git log --since="${sessionCreatedAt}"

Step 3: Changed Files Detection

# Get files changed since session creation
git log --since="${sessionCreatedAt}" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u

Step 4: Output Directory Setup

• Output directory: .workflow/active/${sessionId}/.review/
• Create directory structure:

  mkdir -p ${sessionDir}/.review/{dimensions,iterations,reports}
  

Step 5: Initialize Review State

• State initialization: Create review-state.json with metadata, dimensions, max_iterations (merged metadata + state)
• Progress tracking: Create review-progress.json for progress tracking

Step 6: TodoWrite Initialization

• Set up progress tracking with hierarchical structure
• Mark Phase 1 completed, Phase 2 in_progress

Phase 2: Parallel Review Coordination

• Launch 7 @cli-explore-agent instances simultaneously (Deep Scan mode)
• Pass dimension-specific context (template, timeout, custom focus)
• 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

• Finalize review-progress.json with completion statistics
• Update review-state.json with completion_time and phase=complete
• TodoWrite completion: Mark all tasks done

Session File Structure

.workflow/active/WFS-{session-id}/.review/
├── review-state.json                    # Orchestrator state machine (includes metadata)
├── 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
    └── ...

Session Context:

.workflow/active/WFS-{session-id}/
├── workflow-session.json
├── IMPL_PLAN.md
├── TODO_LIST.md
├── .task/
├── .summaries/
└── .review/                             # Review results (this command)
    └── (structure above)

Review State JSON

Purpose: Unified state machine and metadata (merged from metadata + state)

{
  "session_id": "WFS-payment-integration",
  "review_id": "review-20250125-143022",
  "review_type": "session",
  "metadata": {
    "created_at": "2025-01-25T14:30:22Z",
    "git_changes": {
      "commit_range": "abc123..def456",
      "files_changed": 15,
      "insertions": 342,
      "deletions": 128
    },
    "dimensions": ["security", "architecture", "quality", "action-items", "performance", "maintainability", "best-practices"],
    "max_iterations": 3
  },
  "phase": "parallel|aggregate|iterate|complete",
  "current_iteration": 1,
  "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": [
    {
      "file": "src/payment/processor.ts",
      "finding_count": 5,
      "dimensions": ["security", "architecture", "quality"]
    }
  ],
  "iterations": [
    {
      "iteration": 1,
      "findings_analyzed": ["uuid-1", "uuid-2"],
      "findings_resolved": 1,
      "findings_escalated": 1,
      "severity_change": {
        "before": {"critical": 2, "high": 5, "medium": 12, "low": 8},
        "after": {"critical": 1, "high": 6, "medium": 12, "low": 8}
      },
      "timestamp": "2025-01-25T14:30:00Z"
    }
  ],
  "completion_criteria": {
    "target": "no_critical_findings_and_high_under_5",
    "current_status": "in_progress",
    "estimated_completion": "2 iterations remaining"
  }
}

Field Descriptions:

• phase: Current execution phase (state machine pointer)
• current_iteration: Iteration counter (used for max check)
• next_action: Next step orchestrator should execute
• severity_distribution: Aggregated counts across all dimensions
• critical_files: Files appearing in 3+ dimensions with metadata
• iterations[]: Historical log for trend analysis

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:

1. Dimension Results (cli-explore-agent output from parallel reviews)

   • Schema: ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/review-dimension-results-schema.json
   • Output: .review-cycle/dimensions/{dimension}.json
   • Contains: findings array, summary statistics, cross_references

2. Deep-Dive Results (cli-explore-agent output from iterations)

   • Schema: ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/review-deep-dive-results-schema.json
   • Output: .review-cycle/iterations/iteration-{N}-finding-{uuid}.json
   • Contains: root_cause, remediation_plan, impact_assessment, reassessed_severity

Agent Invocation Template

Review Agent (parallel execution, 7 instances):

Task(
  subagent_type="cli-explore-agent",
  run_in_background=false,
  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 completed implementation in session ${sessionId}

    ## 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 (Execute by Agent)
    **You (cli-explore-agent) MUST execute these steps in order:**
    1. Read session metadata: ${sessionMetadataPath}
    2. Read completed task summaries: bash(find ${summariesDir} -name "IMPL-*.md" -type f)
    3. Get changed files: bash(cd ${workflowDir} && git log --since="${sessionCreatedAt}" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u)
    4. Read review state: ${reviewStateJsonPath}
    5. Execute: cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/review-dimension-results-schema.json (get output schema reference)
    6. Read: .workflow/project-tech.json (technology stack and architecture context)
    7. Read: .workflow/project-guidelines.json (user-defined constraints and conventions to validate against)

    ## Session Context
    - Session ID: ${sessionId}
    - Review Dimension: ${dimension}
    - Review ID: ${reviewId}
    - Implementation Phase: Complete (all tests passing)
    - 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)

    ## Expected Deliverables

    **Schema Reference**: Schema obtained in MANDATORY FIRST STEPS step 5, follow schema exactly

    1. Dimension Results JSON: ${outputDir}/dimensions/${dimension}.json

       **⚠️ CRITICAL JSON STRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS**:

       Root structure MUST be array: \`[{ ... }]\` NOT \`{ ... }\`

       Required top-level fields:
       - dimension, review_id, analysis_timestamp (NOT timestamp/analyzed_at)
       - cli_tool_used (gemini|qwen|codex), model, analysis_duration_ms
       - summary (FLAT structure), findings, cross_references

       Summary MUST be FLAT (NOT nested by_severity):
       \`{ "total_findings": N, "critical": N, "high": N, "medium": N, "low": N, "files_analyzed": N, "lines_reviewed": N }\`

       Finding required fields:
       - id: format \`{dim}-{seq}-{uuid8}\` e.g., \`sec-001-a1b2c3d4\` (lowercase)
       - severity: lowercase only (critical|high|medium|low)
       - snippet (NOT code_snippet), impact (NOT exploit_scenario)
       - metadata, iteration (0), status (pending_remediation), cross_references

    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
    - [ ] Schema obtained via cat review-dimension-results-schema.json
    - [ ] All changed 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 follows schema exactly
    - [ ] Report is comprehensive and well-organized
  `
)

Deep-Dive Agent (iteration execution):

Task(
  subagent_type="cli-explore-agent",
  run_in_background=false,
  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 (Execute by Agent)
    **You (cli-explore-agent) MUST execute these steps in order:**
    1. Read original finding: ${dimensionJsonPath}
    2. Read affected file: ${file}
    3. Identify related code: bash(grep -r "import.*${basename(file)}" ${workflowDir}/src --include="*.ts")
    4. Read test files: bash(find ${workflowDir}/tests -name "*${basename(file, '.ts')}*" -type f)
    5. Execute: cat ~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/review-deep-dive-results-schema.json (get output schema reference)
    6. Read: .workflow/project-tech.json (technology stack and architecture context)
    7. Read: .workflow/project-guidelines.json (user-defined constraints for remediation compliance)

    ## 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

    **Schema Reference**: Schema obtained in MANDATORY FIRST STEPS step 5, follow schema exactly

    1. Deep-Dive Results JSON: ${outputDir}/iterations/iteration-${iteration}-finding-${findingId}.json

       **⚠️ CRITICAL JSON STRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS**:

       Root structure MUST be array: \`[{ ... }]\` NOT \`{ ... }\`

       Required top-level fields:
       - finding_id, dimension, iteration, analysis_timestamp
       - cli_tool_used, model, analysis_duration_ms
       - original_finding, root_cause, remediation_plan
       - impact_assessment, reassessed_severity, confidence_score, cross_references

       All nested objects must follow schema exactly - read schema for field names

    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
    - [ ] Schema obtained via cat review-deep-dive-results-schema.json
    - [ ] 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
    - [ ] JSON output follows schema exactly
    - [ ] 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

Error Handling

Phase-Level Error Matrix:

Phase	Error	Blocking?	Action
Phase 1	Session not found	Yes	Error and exit
Phase 1	No completed tasks	Yes	Error and exit
Phase 1	No changed files	Yes	Error and exit
Phase 2	Single dimension fails	No	Log warning, continue other dimensions
Phase 2	All dimensions fail	Yes	Error and exit
Phase 3	Missing dimension JSON	No	Skip in aggregation, log warning
Phase 4	Deep-dive agent fails	No	Skip finding, continue others
Phase 4	Max iterations reached	No	Generate partial report

CLI Fallback Chain: Gemini → Qwen → Codex → degraded mode

Fallback Triggers:

1. HTTP 429, 5xx errors, connection timeout
2. Invalid JSON output (parse error, missing required fields)
3. Low confidence score < 0.4
4. Analysis too brief (< 100 words in report)

Fallback Behavior:

• On trigger: Retry with next tool in chain
• After Codex fails: Enter degraded mode (skip analysis, log error)
• Degraded mode: Continue workflow with available results

TodoWrite Structure

TodoWrite({
  todos: [
    { content: "Phase 1: Discovery & Initialization", status: "completed", activeForm: "Initializing" },
    { content: "Phase 2: Parallel Reviews (7 dimensions)", status: "in_progress", activeForm: "Reviewing" },
    { content: "  → Security review", status: "in_progress", activeForm: "Analyzing security" },
    // ... other dimensions as sub-items
    { content: "Phase 3: Aggregation", status: "pending", activeForm: "Aggregating" },
    { content: "Phase 4: Deep-dive", status: "pending", activeForm: "Deep-diving" },
    { content: "Phase 5: Completion", status: "pending", activeForm: "Completing" }
  ]
});

Best Practices

1. Default Settings Work: 7 dimensions + 3 iterations sufficient for most cases
2. Parallel Execution: ~60 minutes for full initial review (7 dimensions)
3. Trust Aggregation Logic: Auto-selection based on proven heuristics
4. Monitor Logs: Check reports/ directory for CLI analysis insights

Related Commands

View Review Progress

Use ccw view to open the review dashboard in browser:

ccw view

Automated Fix Workflow

After completing a review, use the generated findings JSON for automated fixing:

# Step 1: Complete review (this command)
/workflow:review-session-cycle

# Step 2: Run automated fixes using dimension findings
/workflow:review-cycle-fix .workflow/active/WFS-{session-id}/.review/

See /workflow:review-cycle-fix for automated fixing with smart grouping, parallel execution, and test verification.