@uniswap/ai-toolkit-nx-claude 0.5.29 → 0.5.30-next.0

package/dist/content/commands/agnostic/review-pr.md

@@ -1,393 +0,0 @@
----
-description: Orchestrate comprehensive pull request review using specialized agents for architecture, security, performance, testing, and maintainability analysis.
-argument-hint: [branch|commit-range] [--depth standard|comprehensive] [--suggest-fixes] [--check-coverage]
-allowed-tools: Bash(git status:*), Bash(git diff:*), Bash(git branch:*), Bash(git log:*), Bash(git show:*), Task(subagent_type:agent-orchestrator), Task(subagent_type:*), Read(*), Grep(*)
----
-
-## Inputs
-
-Parse arguments from `$ARGUMENTS`:
-
-- **branch/commit-range**: Optional specific branch or commit range (defaults to working changes)
-- **--depth**: Review depth (standard|comprehensive) - default: standard
-- **--suggest-fixes**: Generate fix patches (default: true)
-- **--check-coverage**: Verify test coverage (default: true)
-- **--focus**: Specific concerns (architecture|security|performance|all) - default: all
-- **--baseline**: Compare against baseline branch (default: main/master)
-
-Examples:
-
-- `/review-pr` (reviews current uncommitted changes)
-- `/review-pr feature-branch --depth comprehensive`
-- `/review-pr HEAD~3..HEAD --focus security --suggest-fixes`
-- `/review-pr main...develop --check-coverage`
-
-## Context Gathering
-
-First, gather comprehensive context via Bash:
-
-```bash
-# Current state
-git branch --show-current
-git status --porcelain
-
-# Determine diff scope
-if [[ -z "$ARGUMENTS" ]]; then
-  git diff --unified=3 HEAD
-else
-  git log --oneline -20 $ARGUMENTS
-  git diff --unified=3 $ARGUMENTS
-fi
-
-# File statistics
-git diff --stat $TARGET
-git diff --name-status $TARGET
-
-# Commit messages for context
-git log --format="%h %s" -10 $TARGET
-```
-
-## Task
-
-Orchestrate comprehensive PR review through multi-agent coordination:
-
-1. **Change Analysis**: Understand the intent and scope
-2. **Risk Assessment**: Multi-dimensional risk evaluation
-3. **Quality Validation**: Architecture, security, performance checks
-4. **Test Coverage**: Verify adequate testing
-5. **Fix Generation**: Provide actionable improvements
-
-## Orchestration Strategy
-
-### Standard Review (Default)
-
-Quick, focused review of key concerns:
-
-```typescript
-{
-  sequential: [
-    {
-      agent: 'code-explainer',
-      task: 'Analyze changed files for intent and patterns',
-    },
-    {
-      agent: 'security-analyzer',
-      task: 'Quick vulnerability scan',
-    },
-    {
-      agent: 'style-enforcer',
-      task: 'Check style compliance',
-    },
-    {
-      agent: 'test-writer',
-      task: 'Identify missing test coverage',
-    },
-  ];
-}
-```
-
-### Comprehensive Review (--depth comprehensive)
-
-Deep multi-agent analysis:
-
-```typescript
-{
-  orchestrator: "agent-orchestrator",
-  phases: [
-    {
-      name: "Impact Analysis",
-      parallel: [
-        { agent: "code-explainer", focus: "change-intent" },
-        { agent: "context-loader", focus: "affected-systems" }
-      ]
-    },
-    {
-      name: "Quality Assessment",
-      parallel: [
-        { agent: "architect-reviewer", focus: "design-consistency" },
-        { agent: "security-analyzer", focus: "vulnerability-assessment" },
-        { agent: "performance-analyzer", focus: "performance-impact" },
-        { agent: "style-enforcer", focus: "code-standards" }
-      ]
-    },
-    {
-      name: "Test & Documentation",
-      parallel: [
-        { agent: "test-writer", focus: "coverage-gaps" },
-        { agent: "test-runner", focus: "regression-testing" },
-        { agent: "doc-writer", focus: "documentation-updates" }
-      ]
-    },
-    {
-      name: "Fix Generation",
-      sequential: [
-        { agent: "refactorer", focus: "improvement-suggestions" },
-        { agent: "migration-assistant", focus: "breaking-changes" }
-      ]
-    }
-  ]
-}
-```
-
-## Output Format
-
-```typescript
-{
-  summary: {
-    intent: string; // What this PR is trying to achieve
-    scope: {
-      files: number;
-      insertions: number;
-      deletions: number;
-      components: string[]; // Affected components
-    };
-    risk: {
-      overall: 'low' | 'medium' | 'high' | 'critical';
-      breakdown: {
-        architecture: number; // 0-10 scale
-        security: number;
-        performance: number;
-        maintainability: number;
-        testing: number;
-      };
-    };
-    recommendation: 'approve' | 'request-changes' | 'comment';
-  };
-
-  findings: {
-    critical: Array<{
-      type: string; // e.g., "Security Vulnerability", "Breaking Change"
-      file: string;
-      line: number;
-      description: string;
-      suggestion: string;
-      agent: string; // Which agent found this
-    }>;
-
-    major: Array<{
-      type: string;
-      file: string;
-      line: number;
-      description: string;
-      suggestion: string;
-      autoFixAvailable: boolean;
-    }>;
-
-    minor: Array<{
-      type: string;
-      file: string;
-      line: number;
-      description: string;
-      suggestion: string;
-    }>;
-
-    positive: string[]; // Good practices observed
-  };
-
-  architectureReview?: {
-    patternCompliance: boolean;
-    designConsistency: 'excellent' | 'good' | 'acceptable' | 'poor';
-    suggestions: Array<{
-      pattern: string;
-      rationale: string;
-      example: string;
-    }>;
-    breakingChanges: Array<{
-      component: string;
-      change: string;
-      impact: string;
-      migration: string; // Migration guide
-    }>;
-  };
-
-  securityReview?: {
-    vulnerabilities: Array<{
-      type: string; // e.g., "SQL Injection", "XSS", "CSRF"
-      severity: 'critical' | 'high' | 'medium' | 'low';
-      file: string;
-      line: number;
-      fix: string; // Suggested fix
-      cwe: string; // CWE identifier
-    }>;
-    dependencies: Array<{
-      package: string;
-      version: string;
-      vulnerabilities: string[];
-      recommendation: string;
-    }>;
-  };
-
-  performanceReview?: {
-    issues: Array<{
-      type: string; // e.g., "N+1 Query", "Memory Leak", "Inefficient Algorithm"
-      file: string;
-      line: number;
-      impact: 'high' | 'medium' | 'low';
-      optimization: string;
-      benchmark?: string; // Expected improvement
-    }>;
-    complexity: {
-      before: number; // Cyclomatic complexity
-      after: number;
-      delta: string; // e.g., "+15%", "-5%"
-    };
-  };
-
-  testingReview: {
-    coverage: {
-      current: number; // Current coverage %
-      required: number; // Required coverage %
-      gap: number; // Coverage gap
-      uncoveredFiles: Array<{
-        file: string;
-        uncoveredLines: number[];
-      }>;
-    };
-    missingTests: Array<{
-      file: string;
-      functionality: string;
-      suggestedTests: string[];
-      generatedTests?: string; // Generated test code
-    }>;
-    testQuality: {
-      score: number; // 0-100
-      issues: string[]; // e.g., "No edge case testing", "Missing mocks"
-    };
-  };
-
-  patches: Array<{
-    id: string;
-    type: 'fix' | 'improvement' | 'style' | 'documentation';
-    file: string;
-    description: string;
-    diff: string; // Git-style patch
-    automated: boolean; // Can be auto-applied
-    priority: 'must-fix' | 'should-fix' | 'nice-to-have';
-    command?: string; // Command to apply patch
-  }>;
-
-  documentation: {
-    needed: boolean;
-    missing: string[]; // What documentation is missing
-    suggestions: Array<{
-      type: string; // e.g., "API docs", "README update", "Migration guide"
-      content: string; // Suggested content
-    }>;
-  };
-
-  actionItems: {
-    mustFix: string[]; // Blocking issues
-    shouldFix: string[]; // Important but not blocking
-    consider: string[]; // Suggestions for improvement
-    automated: Array<{ // Auto-applicable fixes
-      description: string;
-      command: string;
-    }>;
-  };
-}
-```
-
-## Review Categories
-
-### Architecture Review
-
-- Design pattern compliance
-- SOLID principle violations
-- Dependency management
-- Module boundaries
-- API consistency
-
-### Security Review
-
-- Input validation
-- Authentication/authorization
-- Injection vulnerabilities
-- Sensitive data exposure
-- Dependency vulnerabilities
-
-### Performance Review
-
-- Algorithm complexity
-- Database query efficiency
-- Memory management
-- Caching opportunities
-- Async/concurrent issues
-
-### Maintainability Review
-
-- Code complexity
-- Documentation coverage
-- Test coverage
-- Technical debt
-- Code duplication
-
-## Integration Features
-
-### GitHub/GitLab Integration
-
-```typescript
-{
-  prMetadata: {
-    number: number;
-    title: string;
-    author: string;
-    labels: string[];
-    milestone: string;
-  };
-
-  comments: Array<{
-    file: string;
-    line: number;
-    comment: string;
-    severity: 'blocking' | 'important' | 'suggestion';
-  }>;
-
-  checkStatus: {
-    passed: boolean;
-    checks: Array<{
-      name: string;
-      status: 'passed' | 'failed' | 'warning';
-      details: string;
-    }>;
-  };
-}
-```
-
-## Examples
-
-### Quick Review of Working Changes
-
-```bash
-/review-pr
-# Reviews uncommitted changes with standard depth
-```
-
-### Comprehensive Feature Branch Review
-
-```bash
-/review-pr feature/new-api --depth comprehensive --check-coverage
-# Deep review with test coverage verification
-```
-
-### Security-Focused Review
-
-```bash
-/review-pr HEAD~5..HEAD --focus security --suggest-fixes
-# Security audit of last 5 commits with fix suggestions
-```
-
-### Pre-Merge Final Review
-
-```bash
-/review-pr main...feature-branch --depth comprehensive --baseline main
-# Full review comparing feature branch against main
-```
-
-## Best Practices
-
-1. **Early Reviews**: Run on draft PRs for early feedback
-2. **Incremental Reviews**: Review commits as they're added
-3. **Focus Reviews**: Use focused reviews for faster feedback
-4. **Automate Fixes**: Apply automated fixes to save time
-5. **Track Metrics**: Monitor PR quality metrics over time
-6. **CI Integration**: Include in CI/CD pipelines for consistency