@dreki-gg/pi-code-reviewer 0.1.0 → 0.2.0

package/README.md

@@ -50,8 +50,8 @@ Evaluates changes for correctness and adherence to project standards.
 - Does the change follow naming conventions?
 
 ## Tools
-- `bun run typecheck`
-- `bun run lint`
+- `npm run typecheck`
+- `npm run lint`
 
 ## Severity
 - blocker: Type errors, unresolved imports
@@ -67,8 +67,8 @@ The package ships with four example lenses:
 | --- | --- |
 | `code-quality` | Correctness, lint, types, dead code |
 | `maintainability` | Coupling, complexity, readability |
-| `product-vision` | Alignment with product direction |
-| `ux-design` | Accessibility, responsiveness, interaction quality |
+| `product-vision` | Traces changes back to their originating issue or design doc, checks goal alignment |
+| `accessibility` | Semantic HTML, keyboard navigation, ARIA, screen reader compatibility |
 
 Run `/review-init` to scaffold these (customized for your project's tools) into `.code-review/lenses/`.
 

package/extensions/code-reviewer/commands/review-tool.ts

@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ export function registerReviewTool(pi: ExtensionAPI) {
       ),
     }),
 
-    async execute(_toolCallId, params, signal, _onUpdate, ctx) {
+    async execute(_toolCallId, params, signal, onUpdate, ctx) {
       const cwd = ctx.cwd;
       const config = loadConfig(cwd);
       const lensDir = getLensDir(cwd, config);
@@ -58,12 +58,14 @@ export function registerReviewTool(pi: ExtensionAPI) {
 
       const lensNames = resolveLensNames(params.lenses, config, available);
 
+      ctx.ui.setStatus('code-review', '🔍 Collecting diff...');
       const diff = await collectDiff(pi, cwd, {
         base: params.base,
         staged: params.staged,
       });
 
       if (!diff.diff.trim()) {
+        ctx.ui.setStatus('code-review', undefined);
         return {
           content: [{ type: 'text', text: 'No changes to review.' }],
           details: {},
@@ -71,15 +73,25 @@ export function registerReviewTool(pi: ExtensionAPI) {
       }
 
       const results: LensResult[] = [];
-      for (const name of lensNames) {
+      for (let i = 0; i < lensNames.length; i++) {
         if (signal?.aborted) break;
 
+        const name = lensNames[i];
+        const progressMsg = `Lens ${i + 1}/${lensNames.length}: ${name}`;
+        ctx.ui.setStatus('code-review', `🔍 ${progressMsg}`);
+        onUpdate?.({
+          content: [{ type: 'text', text: progressMsg }],
+          details: { currentLens: name, lensIndex: i + 1, totalLenses: lensNames.length },
+        });
+
         const lens = available.get(name)!;
         const content = getLensContent(lensDir, name) ?? '';
         const result = await reviewWithLens(pi, ctx, cwd, lens, content, diff, signal);
         results.push(result);
       }
 
+      ctx.ui.setStatus('code-review', undefined);
+
       const report: ReviewReport = {
         diff: diff.diff,
         diffStat: diff.stat,

package/extensions/code-reviewer/commands/review.ts

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ import type { ExtensionAPI } from '@earendil-works/pi-coding-agent';
 import { loadConfig, getLensDir } from '../config';
 import { collectDiff } from '../diff';
 import { discoverLenses, getLensContent } from '../lenses';
-import { reviewWithLens } from '../reviewer';
+import { reviewWithLens, buildDiffSection } from '../reviewer';
 import { parseReviewArgs } from '../parse-args';
 
 export function registerReviewCommand(pi: ExtensionAPI) {
@@ -34,36 +34,61 @@ export function registerReviewCommand(pi: ExtensionAPI) {
         return;
       }
 
+      ctx.ui.setStatus('code-review', '🔍 Collecting diff...');
       const diff = await collectDiff(pi, cwd, {
         base: parsed.base,
         staged: parsed.staged,
       });
 
       if (!diff.diff.trim()) {
+        ctx.ui.setStatus('code-review', undefined);
         ctx.ui.notify('No changes to review', 'info');
         return;
       }
 
       ctx.ui.notify(`Reviewing ${diff.label} through ${lensNames.length} lens(es)...`, 'info');
+      ctx.ui.setStatus('code-review', `🔍 Reviewing (0/${lensNames.length})...`);
+
+      const lensSections: string[] = [];
+      for (let i = 0; i < lensNames.length; i++) {
+        const name = lensNames[i];
+        ctx.ui.setStatus('code-review', `🔍 Lens ${i + 1}/${lensNames.length}: ${name}`);
 
-      const lensPrompts: string[] = [];
-      for (const name of lensNames) {
         const lens = available.get(name)!;
         const content = getLensContent(lensDir, name) ?? '';
         const result = await reviewWithLens(pi, ctx, cwd, lens, content, diff);
 
-        if (result._prompt) {
-          lensPrompts.push(result._prompt);
+        if (result._lensSection) {
+          lensSections.push(result._lensSection);
         }
       }
 
+      ctx.ui.setStatus('code-review', undefined);
+
       const combinedPrompt = [
         `Review the following changes through ${lensNames.length} lens(es): ${lensNames.join(', ')}.`,
         '',
         'For each lens, evaluate the diff against its criteria and produce findings.',
         'Output your review as a structured report with sections per lens.',
         '',
-        ...lensPrompts,
+        buildDiffSection(diff),
+        '',
+        '## Lenses',
+        '',
+        ...lensSections,
+        '',
+        '## Instructions',
+        '',
+        'For each lens above, review the diff and output a JSON array of findings:',
+        '',
+        '```json',
+        '[',
+        '  { "file": "path/to/file.ts", "line": 42, "severity": "warning", "message": "Description" }',
+        ']',
+        '```',
+        '',
+        'After each lens JSON array, write a 2-3 sentence summary.',
+        'If there are no findings for a lens, return an empty array `[]` and note the code looks good.',
       ].join('\n');
 
       pi.sendUserMessage(combinedPrompt, { deliverAs: 'followUp' });

package/extensions/code-reviewer/reviewer.ts

@@ -33,23 +33,13 @@ async function runLensTools(
   return outputs;
 }
 
-/** Build the review prompt for a single lens. */
-function buildReviewPrompt(
-  lens: LensConfig,
-  lensContent: string,
-  diff: DiffSource,
-  toolOutputs: Record<string, string>,
-): string {
+/** Build the shared diff section of the review prompt (included once). */
+export function buildDiffSection(diff: DiffSource): string {
   const parts: string[] = [];
-
-  parts.push(`You are reviewing code changes through the "${lens.name}" lens.`);
-  parts.push('');
-  parts.push('## Lens Definition');
-  parts.push(lensContent);
-  parts.push('');
-  parts.push(`## Diff (${diff.label})`);
   const maxDiffLen = 50_000;
   const diffTruncated = diff.diff.length > maxDiffLen;
+
+  parts.push(`## Diff (${diff.label})`);
   parts.push('```diff');
   parts.push(diff.diff.slice(0, maxDiffLen));
   parts.push('```');
@@ -64,21 +54,60 @@ function buildReviewPrompt(
   parts.push(diff.stat);
   parts.push('```');
 
+  return parts.join('\n');
+}
+
+/** Build the lens-specific section of the review prompt (no diff duplication). */
+function buildLensSection(
+  lens: LensConfig,
+  lensContent: string,
+  toolOutputs: Record<string, string>,
+): string {
+  const parts: string[] = [];
+
+  parts.push(`### Lens: ${lens.name}`);
+  parts.push('');
+  parts.push('#### Lens Definition');
+  parts.push(lensContent);
+
   if (Object.keys(toolOutputs).length > 0) {
     parts.push('');
-    parts.push('## Tool Outputs');
+    parts.push('#### Tool Outputs');
     for (const [cmd, output] of Object.entries(toolOutputs)) {
-      parts.push(`### \`${cmd}\``);
+      parts.push(`##### \`${cmd}\``);
       parts.push('```');
       parts.push(output.slice(0, 20_000));
       parts.push('```');
     }
   }
 
+  parts.push('');
+  parts.push('#### Severity levels');
+  if (lens.severityRules.blocker) parts.push(`- **blocker**: ${lens.severityRules.blocker}`);
+  if (lens.severityRules.warning) parts.push(`- **warning**: ${lens.severityRules.warning}`);
+  if (lens.severityRules.note) parts.push(`- **note**: ${lens.severityRules.note}`);
+
+  return parts.join('\n');
+}
+
+/** Build the full review prompt for a single lens (includes diff — used by the tool path). */
+function buildReviewPrompt(
+  lens: LensConfig,
+  lensContent: string,
+  diff: DiffSource,
+  toolOutputs: Record<string, string>,
+): string {
+  const parts: string[] = [];
+
+  parts.push(`You are reviewing code changes through the "${lens.name}" lens.`);
+  parts.push('');
+  parts.push(buildDiffSection(diff));
+  parts.push('');
+  parts.push(buildLensSection(lens, lensContent, toolOutputs));
   parts.push('');
   parts.push('## Instructions');
   parts.push('');
-  parts.push('Review the diff through this lens. For each finding, output a JSON array:');
+  parts.push('Review the diff above through this lens. For each finding, output a JSON array:');
   parts.push('');
   parts.push('```json');
   parts.push('[');
@@ -88,11 +117,6 @@ function buildReviewPrompt(
   parts.push(']');
   parts.push('```');
   parts.push('');
-  parts.push('Severity levels:');
-  if (lens.severityRules.blocker) parts.push(`- **blocker**: ${lens.severityRules.blocker}`);
-  if (lens.severityRules.warning) parts.push(`- **warning**: ${lens.severityRules.warning}`);
-  if (lens.severityRules.note) parts.push(`- **note**: ${lens.severityRules.note}`);
-  parts.push('');
   parts.push(
     'After the JSON array, write a 2-3 sentence summary of your review through this lens.',
   );
@@ -116,15 +140,14 @@ export async function reviewWithLens(
 
   // Build the prompt
   const prompt = buildReviewPrompt(lens, lensContent, diff, toolOutputs);
+  const lensSection = buildLensSection(lens, lensContent, toolOutputs);
 
-  // Use sendMessage to delegate to the agent for review
-  // For now, we return the prompt and let the command handler
-  // pass it to a subagent via the subagent tool
   return {
     lens: lens.name,
     findings: [],
     summary: '',
     toolOutputs,
     _prompt: prompt,
+    _lensSection: lensSection,
   };
 }

package/extensions/code-reviewer/types.ts

@@ -22,6 +22,8 @@ export type LensResult = {
   toolOutputs?: Record<string, string>;
   /** Review prompt built for this lens, used internally to delegate to the agent. */
   _prompt?: string;
+  /** Lens-specific section (without diff), used by /review command to avoid diff duplication. */
+  _lensSection?: string;
 };
 
 export type ReviewConfig = {

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "@dreki-gg/pi-code-reviewer",
-  "version": "0.1.0",
+  "version": "0.2.0",
   "description": "Multi-lens code review extension for pi — configurable review criteria per project",
   "keywords": [
     "pi-package"

package/skills/code-review/SKILL.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 name: code-review
-description: Multi-lens code review against working directory changes. Evaluates diffs through configurable criteria like code-quality, maintainability, product-vision, and ux-design. Use when user says "review my changes", "review this code", "check before committing", or "code review".
+description: Multi-lens code review against working directory changes. Evaluates diffs through configurable criteria like code-quality, maintainability, product-vision, and accessibility. Use when user says "review my changes", "review this code", "check before committing", or "code review".
 ---
 
 # Code Review
@@ -36,8 +36,8 @@ Description of what this lens evaluates.
 - Evaluation point 2
 
 ## Tools
-- `bun run typecheck`
-- `bun run codeql:fallow -- --changed-since HEAD`
+- `npm run typecheck`
+- `npm run lint`
 
 ## Severity
 - blocker: What constitutes a blocking issue

package/skills/code-review/lenses/accessibility.md

@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+# Accessibility
+
+Evaluates UI changes for accessibility compliance — semantic markup, keyboard support, screen reader compatibility, and inclusive design patterns.
+
+## Criteria
+- Are interactive elements accessible via keyboard (tab order, Enter/Space activation, Escape to dismiss)?
+- Do custom components use appropriate ARIA roles, states, and properties?
+- Are images and icons accompanied by meaningful alt text or aria-label?
+- Are form inputs associated with visible labels (not just placeholder text)?
+- Does the change use semantic HTML elements (button, nav, main, dialog) instead of generic divs with click handlers?
+- Is focus managed correctly after dynamic content changes (modals, route transitions, toast notifications)?
+- Are error and validation messages announced to screen readers (aria-live, role="alert")?
+- Does the color usage rely solely on color to convey meaning, or is there a secondary indicator (icon, text)?
+
+## Tools
+
+## Severity
+- blocker: Interactive elements unreachable by keyboard, missing labels on form inputs, click handlers on non-interactive elements without ARIA roles
+- warning: Missing alt text, placeholder-only labels, missing aria-live on dynamic content, focus not managed after modals
+- note: Semantic HTML improvements, ARIA attribute refinements, color contrast suggestions

package/skills/code-review/lenses/product-vision.md

@@ -1,19 +1,19 @@
 # Product Vision
 
-Evaluates whether changes align with the product direction and serve real user needs.
+Evaluates whether changes fulfill the intent behind the work — traces the diff back to its originating issue, PR description, or design doc and checks alignment.
 
 ## Criteria
-- Does this change serve existing users or is it speculative?
-- Does it introduce UI concepts or flows that don't exist elsewhere in the app?
-- Does it add unnecessary complexity to user-facing functionality?
-- Does it respect the established information architecture?
-- Is the feature discoverable and intuitive?
-- Does it follow the project's domain language (check CONTEXT.md if it exists)?
-- Are there simpler alternatives that would achieve the same user goal?
+- Is there a linked issue, PR description, or design document that explains why this change was requested?
+- Does the diff actually accomplish the stated goal, or does it drift into unrelated concerns?
+- Are there parts of the requirement left unaddressed by the change?
+- Does the change introduce scope creep beyond what was requested?
+- Does it follow the project's domain language (check CONTEXT.md, glossary, or naming conventions)?
+- Are user-facing strings consistent with the existing product vocabulary?
+- If the change modifies a public API or user flow, is that justified by the original request?
 
 ## Tools
 
 ## Severity
-- blocker: Changes that contradict the product direction or break existing user workflows
-- warning: Speculative features, unnecessary complexity, inconsistent UX patterns
-- note: Opportunities to better align with product vision
+- blocker: Change does not accomplish the stated goal, or contradicts the originating requirement
+- warning: Scope creep beyond the request, unaddressed requirements, inconsistent domain language
+- note: Opportunities to better align naming or structure with the stated intent

package/skills/code-review/lenses/ux-design.md

@@ -1,20 +0,0 @@
-# UX Design
-
-Evaluates the user experience quality of UI changes — accessibility, responsiveness, and interaction design.
-
-## Criteria
-- Are interactive elements accessible (keyboard navigation, ARIA labels, focus management)?
-- Are loading and error states handled visually?
-- Is the layout responsive or does it break at common viewport sizes?
-- Are animations purposeful and not distracting (100-200ms, no bouncy effects)?
-- Is text readable (minimum 12px body, sufficient contrast)?
-- Are form inputs properly labeled with clear validation feedback?
-- Does the change follow the project's existing component patterns?
-- Are click targets large enough for touch (minimum 44px)?
-
-## Tools
-
-## Severity
-- blocker: Missing keyboard accessibility on interactive elements, broken layout, no error states on data-fetching UI
-- warning: Missing ARIA labels, tiny text (<12px), missing loading states, non-responsive layout
-- note: Animation polish, spacing consistency, component reuse opportunities