mirror of
https://github.com/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow.git
synced 2026-02-05 01:50:27 +08:00
- Updated command patterns across documentation and templates to reflect the new CLI syntax. - Enhanced CLI tool implementation to support reading prompts from files and multi-line inputs. - Modified core components and views to ensure compatibility with the new command structure. - Adjusted help messages and internationalization strings to align with the updated command format. - Improved error handling and user notifications in the CLI execution flow.
9.9 KiB
9.9 KiB
name, description, argument-hint
| name | description | argument-hint |
|---|---|---|
| review | Post-implementation review with specialized types (security/architecture/action-items/quality) using analysis agents and Gemini | [--type=security|architecture|action-items|quality] [optional: session-id] |
Command Overview: /workflow:review
Optional specialized review for completed implementations. In the standard workflow, passing tests = approved code. Use this command only when specialized review is required (security, architecture, compliance, docs).
Philosophy: "Tests Are the Review"
- Default: All tests pass -> Code approved
- Optional: Specialized reviews for:
- Security audits (vulnerabilities, auth/authz)
- Architecture compliance (patterns, technical debt)
- Action items verification (requirements met, acceptance criteria)
Review Types
| Type | Focus | Use Case |
|---|---|---|
quality |
Code quality, best practices, maintainability | Default general review |
security |
Security vulnerabilities, data handling, access control | Security audits |
architecture |
Architectural patterns, technical debt, design decisions | Architecture compliance |
action-items |
Requirements met, acceptance criteria verified, action items completed | Pre-deployment verification |
Notes:
- For documentation generation, use
/workflow:tools:docs - For CLAUDE.md updates, use
/update-memory-related
Execution Process
Input Parsing:
├─ Parse --type flag (default: quality)
└─ Parse session-id argument (optional)
Step 1: Session Resolution
└─ Decision:
├─ session-id provided → Use provided session
└─ Not provided → Auto-detect from .workflow/active/
Step 2: Validation
├─ Check session directory exists
└─ Check for completed implementation (.summaries/IMPL-*.md exists)
Step 3: Type Check
└─ Decision:
├─ type=docs → Redirect to /workflow:tools:docs
└─ Other types → Continue to analysis
Step 4: Model Analysis Phase
├─ Load context (summaries, test results, changed files)
└─ Perform specialized review by type:
├─ security → Security patterns + Gemini analysis
├─ architecture → Qwen architecture analysis
├─ quality → Gemini code quality analysis
└─ action-items → Requirements verification
Step 5: Generate Report
└─ Output: REVIEW-{type}.md
Execution Template
#!/bin/bash
# Optional specialized review for completed implementation
# Step 1: Session ID resolution
if [ -n "$SESSION_ARG" ]; then
sessionId="$SESSION_ARG"
else
sessionId=$(find .workflow/active/ -name "WFS-*" -type d | head -1 | xargs basename)
fi
# Step 2: Validation
if [ ! -d ".workflow/active/${sessionId}" ]; then
echo "Session ${sessionId} not found"
exit 1
fi
# Check for completed tasks
if [ ! -d ".workflow/active/${sessionId}/.summaries" ] || [ -z "$(find .workflow/active/${sessionId}/.summaries/ -name "IMPL-*.md" -type f 2>/dev/null)" ]; then
echo "No completed implementation found. Complete implementation first"
exit 1
fi
# Step 3: Determine review type (default: quality)
review_type="${TYPE_ARG:-quality}"
# Redirect docs review to specialized command
if [ "$review_type" = "docs" ]; then
echo "For documentation generation, please use:"
echo " /workflow:tools:docs"
echo ""
echo "The docs command provides:"
echo " - Hierarchical architecture documentation"
echo " - API documentation generation"
echo " - Documentation structure analysis"
exit 0
fi
# Step 4: Analysis handover → Model takes control
# BASH_EXECUTION_STOPS → MODEL_ANALYSIS_BEGINS
Model Analysis Phase
After bash validation, the model takes control to:
-
Load Context: Read completed task summaries and changed files
# Load implementation summaries (iterate through .summaries/ directory) for summary in .workflow/active/${sessionId}/.summaries/*.md; do cat "$summary" done # Load test results (if available) for test_summary in .workflow/active/${sessionId}/.summaries/TEST-FIX-*.md 2>/dev/null; do cat "$test_summary" done # Get changed files git log --since="$(cat .workflow/active/${sessionId}/workflow-session.json | jq -r .created_at)" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u -
Perform Specialized Review: Based on
review_typeSecurity Review (
--type=security):- Use ripgrep for security patterns:
rg "password|token|secret|auth" -g "*.{ts,js,py}" rg "eval|exec|innerHTML|dangerouslySetInnerHTML" -g "*.{ts,js,tsx}" - Use Gemini for security analysis:
ccw cli -p " PURPOSE: Security audit of completed implementation TASK: Review code for security vulnerabilities, insecure patterns, auth/authz issues CONTEXT: @.summaries/IMPL-*.md,../.. @../../CLAUDE.md EXPECTED: Security findings report with severity levels RULES: Focus on OWASP Top 10, authentication, authorization, data validation, injection risks " --tool gemini --mode write --cd .workflow/active/${sessionId}
Architecture Review (
--type=architecture):- Use Qwen for architecture analysis:
ccw cli -p " PURPOSE: Architecture compliance review TASK: Evaluate adherence to architectural patterns, identify technical debt, review design decisions CONTEXT: @.summaries/IMPL-*.md,../.. @../../CLAUDE.md EXPECTED: Architecture assessment with recommendations RULES: Check for patterns, separation of concerns, modularity, scalability " --tool qwen --mode write --cd .workflow/active/${sessionId}
Quality Review (
--type=quality):- Use Gemini for code quality:
ccw cli -p " PURPOSE: Code quality and best practices review TASK: Assess code readability, maintainability, adherence to best practices CONTEXT: @.summaries/IMPL-*.md,../.. @../../CLAUDE.md EXPECTED: Quality assessment with improvement suggestions RULES: Check for code smells, duplication, complexity, naming conventions " --tool gemini --mode write --cd .workflow/active/${sessionId}
Action Items Review (
--type=action-items):- Verify all requirements and acceptance criteria met:
# Load task requirements and acceptance criteria for task_file in .workflow/active/${sessionId}/.task/*.json; do cat "$task_file" | jq -r ' "Task: " + .id + "\n" + "Requirements: " + (.context.requirements | join(", ")) + "\n" + "Acceptance: " + (.context.acceptance | join(", ")) ' done # Check implementation summaries against requirements ccw cli -p " PURPOSE: Verify all requirements and acceptance criteria are met TASK: Cross-check implementation summaries against original requirements CONTEXT: @.task/IMPL-*.json,.summaries/IMPL-*.md,../.. @../../CLAUDE.md EXPECTED: - Requirements coverage matrix - Acceptance criteria verification - Missing/incomplete action items - Pre-deployment readiness assessment RULES: - Check each requirement has corresponding implementation - Verify all acceptance criteria are met - Flag any incomplete or missing action items - Assess deployment readiness " --tool gemini --mode write --cd .workflow/active/${sessionId}
- Use ripgrep for security patterns:
-
Generate Review Report: Create structured report
# Review Report: ${review_type} **Session**: ${sessionId} **Date**: $(date) **Type**: ${review_type} ## Summary - Tasks Reviewed: [count IMPL tasks] - Files Changed: [count files] - Severity: [High/Medium/Low] ## Findings ### Critical Issues - [Issue 1 with file:line reference] - [Issue 2 with file:line reference] ### Recommendations - [Recommendation 1] - [Recommendation 2] ### Positive Observations - [Good pattern observed] ## Action Items - [ ] [Action 1] - [ ] [Action 2] -
Output Files:
# Save review report Write(.workflow/active/${sessionId}/REVIEW-${review_type}.md) # Update session metadata # (optional) Update workflow-session.json with review status -
Optional: Update Memory (if docs review or significant findings):
# If architecture or quality issues found, suggest memory update if [ "$review_type" = "architecture" ] || [ "$review_type" = "quality" ]; then echo "Consider updating project documentation:" echo " /update-memory-related" fi
Usage Examples
# General quality review after implementation
/workflow:review
# Security audit before deployment
/workflow:review --type=security
# Architecture review for specific session
/workflow:review --type=architecture WFS-payment-integration
# Documentation review
/workflow:review --type=docs
Features
- Simple Validation: Check session exists and has completed tasks
- No Complex Orchestration: Direct analysis, no multi-phase pipeline
- Specialized Reviews: Different prompts and tools for different review types
- MCP Integration: Fast code search for security and architecture patterns
- CLI Tool Integration: Gemini for analysis, Qwen for architecture
- Structured Output: Markdown reports with severity levels and action items
- Optional Memory Update: Suggests documentation updates for significant findings
Integration with Workflow
Standard Workflow:
plan -> execute -> test-gen -> execute (complete)
Optional Review (when needed):
plan -> execute -> test-gen -> execute -> review (security/architecture/docs)
When to Use:
- Before production deployment (security review + action-items review)
- After major feature (architecture review)
- Before code freeze (quality review)
- Pre-deployment verification (action-items review)
When NOT to Use:
- Regular development (tests are sufficient)
- Simple bug fixes (test-fix-agent handles it)
- Minor changes (update-memory-related is enough)