review-changes
npx skills add https://github.com/duc01226/easyplatform --skill review-changes
Agent 安装分布
Skill 文档
Code Review: Uncommitted Changes
Perform a comprehensive code review of all uncommitted git changes following EasyPlatform standards.
Summary
Goal: Review all uncommitted changes via a report-driven three-phase process before commit.
| Step | Action | Key Notes |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Get changes & create report | git diff HEAD, create plans/reports/code-review-*.md |
| 2 | File-by-file review | Read each diff, update report with summary/purpose/issues |
| 3 | Holistic review | Re-read accumulated report for architecture coherence |
| 4 | Generate final findings | Critical issues, warnings, suggestions, commit message |
Key Principles:
- Build report incrementally — update after EACH file, not at the end
- Check logic placement in lowest layer (Entity > Service > Component)
- Always suggest conventional commit message based on changes
Review Approach (Report-Driven Three-Phase – CRITICAL)
â MANDATORY FIRST: Create Todo Tasks for Review Phases Before starting, call TodoWrite with:
-
[Review Phase 0] Get git changes and create report file– in_progress -
[Review Phase 1] Review file-by-file and update report– pending -
[Review Phase 2] Re-read report for holistic assessment– pending -
[Review Phase 3] Generate final review findings– pending
Update todo status as each phase completes. This ensures review is tracked.
Phase 0: Get Changes & Create Report
0.1 Get Change Summary
# See all changed files
git status
# See actual changes (staged and unstaged)
git diff HEAD
0.2 Create Report File
- Create
plans/reports/code-review-{date}-{slug}.md - Initialize with Scope (list of changed files), Change Type (feature/bugfix/refactor)
Phase 1: File-by-File Review (Build Report Incrementally)
For EACH changed file, read the diff and immediately update report with:
- File path
- Change Summary: what was modified/added/deleted
- Purpose: why this change exists (infer from context)
- Issues Found: naming, typing, responsibility, patterns
- Continue to next file, repeat
Review Checklist Per File
Architecture Compliance
- Follows Clean Architecture layers (Domain, Application, Persistence, Service)
- Uses correct repository pattern (I{Service}RootRepository)
- CQRS pattern: Command/Query + Handler + Result in ONE file
- No cross-service direct database access
Code Quality
- Single Responsibility Principle
- No code duplication (DRY)
- Appropriate error handling with PlatformValidationResult
- No magic numbers/strings (extract to named constants)
- Type annotations on all functions
- No implicit any types
- Early returns/guard clauses used
Naming Conventions
- Names reveal intent (WHAT not HOW)
- Specific names, not generic (
employeeRecordsnotdata) - Methods: Verb + Noun (
getEmployee,validateInput) - Booleans: is/has/can/should prefix (
isActive,hasPermission) - No cryptic abbreviations (
employeeCountnotempCnt)
Platform Patterns
- Uses platform validation fluent API (.And(), .AndAsync())
- No direct side effects in command handlers (use entity events)
- DTO mapping in DTO classes, not handlers
- Static expressions for entity queries
Security
- No hardcoded credentials or secrets
- Proper authorization checks
- Input validation at boundaries
- No SQL injection risks
Performance
- No O(n²) complexity (use dictionary for lookups)
- No N+1 query patterns (batch load related entities)
- Project only needed properties (don’t load all then select one)
- Pagination for all list queries
- Parallel queries for independent operations
- Appropriate use of async/await
Backend-Specific Checks
- CQRS patterns followed correctly
- Repository usage (no direct DbContext access)
- Entity DTO mapping patterns
- Validation using PlatformValidationResult
Frontend-Specific Checks
- Component base class inheritance correct (AppBase*)
- State management via PlatformVmStore
- Memory leaks (missing .pipe(this.untilDestroyed()))
- BEM classes on ALL template elements
Common Anti-Patterns to Flag
- Unused imports or variables
- Console.log/Debug.WriteLine left in code
- Hardcoded values that should be configuration
- Missing async/await keywords
- Incorrect exception handling
- Missing validation
Phase 2: Holistic Review (Review the Accumulated Report)
After ALL files reviewed, re-read the report to see big picture:
- Overall technical approach makes sense?
- Solution architecture coherent as unified plan?
- New files in correct layers (Domain/Application/Presentation)?
- Logic in LOWEST appropriate layer?
- Backend: mapping in Command/DTO (not Handler)?
- Frontend: constants/columns in Model (not Component)?
- No duplicated logic across changes?
- Service boundaries respected?
- No circular dependencies?
Phase 3: Generate Final Review Result
Update report with final sections:
Output Format
Summary: Brief overall assessment of the changes
Critical Issues: (Must fix before commit)
- Issue 1: Description and suggested fix
- Issue 2: Description and suggested fix
Warnings: (Should consider fixing)
- Warning 1: Description
- Warning 2: Description
Suggestions: (Nice to have)
- Suggestion 1
- Suggestion 2
Positive Notes:
- What was done well
Architecture Recommendations: (If applicable)
- Recommendation 1
Suggested Commit Message: Based on changes (conventional commit format)
<type>(<scope>): <description>
<body - what and why>
IMPORTANT Task Planning Notes
- Always plan and break many small todo tasks
- Always add a final review todo task to review the works done at the end to find any fix or enhancement needed