aigroup-workflow 2.2.1 → 2.2.2

package/skills/quality/code-reviewer/references/report-template.md

@@ -1,109 +1,109 @@
-# Report Template
-
-## Full Review Report Template
-
-```markdown
-# Code Review: [PR Title]
-
-## Summary
-[1-2 sentence overview of the changes and overall assessment]
-
-**Verdict**: [ ] Approve | [x] Request Changes | [ ] Comment
-
-## Critical Issues (Must Fix)
-
-### 1. [File:Line] Security: SQL Injection Risk
-- **Current**: String interpolation in query
-- **Suggested**: Use parameterized query
-- **Impact**: Potential data breach
-
-```typescript
-// Current (vulnerable)
-const query = `SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = ${id}`;
-
-// Suggested (secure)
-const query = 'SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = $1';
-db.query(query, [id]);
-```
-
-## Major Issues (Should Fix)
-
-### 1. [File:Line] Performance: N+1 Query
-- **Current**: Fetching users in loop
-- **Suggested**: Use eager loading with include
-- **Impact**: ~100 extra DB queries per request
-
-### 2. [File:Line] Logic: Missing edge case
-- **Current**: No handling for empty array
-- **Suggested**: Add guard clause
-- **Impact**: Potential runtime error
-
-## Minor Issues (Nice to Have)
-
-### 1. [File:Line] Naming: Unclear variable name
-- **Current**: `d`
-- **Suggested**: `createdDate`
-
-### 2. [File:Line] Style: Inconsistent formatting
-- **Current**: Mixed quotes
-- **Suggested**: Use single quotes consistently
-
-## Positive Feedback
-- Clean separation of concerns in service layer
-- Comprehensive input validation on DTOs
-- Good test coverage for edge cases
-- Excellent error messages
-
-## Questions for Author
-- What's the expected behavior when X happens?
-- Should this support pagination for large datasets?
-- Is the retry logic intentional or accidental?
-
-## Test Coverage Assessment
-- [ ] Happy path tested
-- [x] Error cases tested
-- [ ] Edge cases tested (missing empty array test)
-- [x] Integration tests present
-
-## Checklist
-- [x] No security vulnerabilities
-- [ ] Performance is acceptable (N+1 issue)
-- [x] Code is readable
-- [x] Tests are adequate
-- [x] Documentation is present
-```
-
-## Verdict Guidelines
-
-| Verdict | When to Use |
-|---------|-------------|
-| **Approve** | No blocking issues, minor suggestions only |
-| **Request Changes** | Critical or major issues must be fixed |
-| **Comment** | Questions need answers, no blocking issues |
-
-## Severity Definitions
-
-| Severity | Definition | Examples |
-|----------|------------|----------|
-| **Critical** | Security risk, data loss, crashes | SQL injection, auth bypass |
-| **Major** | Significant performance, maintainability | N+1 queries, god functions |
-| **Minor** | Style, naming, small improvements | Variable names, formatting |
-
-## Time Boxing
-
-| Section | Suggested Time |
-|---------|----------------|
-| Context & understanding | 5 minutes |
-| Critical/security review | 10 minutes |
-| Logic & performance | 15 minutes |
-| Tests review | 10 minutes |
-| Writing report | 10 minutes |
-| **Total** | ~50 minutes |
-
-## Quick Checks Before Submitting
-
-- [ ] All critical issues have clear remediation
-- [ ] Major issues explain the impact
-- [ ] At least one positive comment included
-- [ ] Questions are specific and answerable
-- [ ] Verdict matches the issues found
+# Report Template
+
+## Full Review Report Template
+
+```markdown
+# Code Review: [PR Title]
+
+## Summary
+[1-2 sentence overview of the changes and overall assessment]
+
+**Verdict**: [ ] Approve | [x] Request Changes | [ ] Comment
+
+## Critical Issues (Must Fix)
+
+### 1. [File:Line] Security: SQL Injection Risk
+- **Current**: String interpolation in query
+- **Suggested**: Use parameterized query
+- **Impact**: Potential data breach
+
+```typescript
+// Current (vulnerable)
+const query = `SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = ${id}`;
+
+// Suggested (secure)
+const query = 'SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = $1';
+db.query(query, [id]);
+```
+
+## Major Issues (Should Fix)
+
+### 1. [File:Line] Performance: N+1 Query
+- **Current**: Fetching users in loop
+- **Suggested**: Use eager loading with include
+- **Impact**: ~100 extra DB queries per request
+
+### 2. [File:Line] Logic: Missing edge case
+- **Current**: No handling for empty array
+- **Suggested**: Add guard clause
+- **Impact**: Potential runtime error
+
+## Minor Issues (Nice to Have)
+
+### 1. [File:Line] Naming: Unclear variable name
+- **Current**: `d`
+- **Suggested**: `createdDate`
+
+### 2. [File:Line] Style: Inconsistent formatting
+- **Current**: Mixed quotes
+- **Suggested**: Use single quotes consistently
+
+## Positive Feedback
+- Clean separation of concerns in service layer
+- Comprehensive input validation on DTOs
+- Good test coverage for edge cases
+- Excellent error messages
+
+## Questions for Author
+- What's the expected behavior when X happens?
+- Should this support pagination for large datasets?
+- Is the retry logic intentional or accidental?
+
+## Test Coverage Assessment
+- [ ] Happy path tested
+- [x] Error cases tested
+- [ ] Edge cases tested (missing empty array test)
+- [x] Integration tests present
+
+## Checklist
+- [x] No security vulnerabilities
+- [ ] Performance is acceptable (N+1 issue)
+- [x] Code is readable
+- [x] Tests are adequate
+- [x] Documentation is present
+```
+
+## Verdict Guidelines
+
+| Verdict | When to Use |
+|---------|-------------|
+| **Approve** | No blocking issues, minor suggestions only |
+| **Request Changes** | Critical or major issues must be fixed |
+| **Comment** | Questions need answers, no blocking issues |
+
+## Severity Definitions
+
+| Severity | Definition | Examples |
+|----------|------------|----------|
+| **Critical** | Security risk, data loss, crashes | SQL injection, auth bypass |
+| **Major** | Significant performance, maintainability | N+1 queries, god functions |
+| **Minor** | Style, naming, small improvements | Variable names, formatting |
+
+## Time Boxing
+
+| Section | Suggested Time |
+|---------|----------------|
+| Context & understanding | 5 minutes |
+| Critical/security review | 10 minutes |
+| Logic & performance | 15 minutes |
+| Tests review | 10 minutes |
+| Writing report | 10 minutes |
+| **Total** | ~50 minutes |
+
+## Quick Checks Before Submitting
+
+- [ ] All critical issues have clear remediation
+- [ ] Major issues explain the impact
+- [ ] At least one positive comment included
+- [ ] Questions are specific and answerable
+- [ ] Verdict matches the issues found

package/skills/quality/code-reviewer/references/review-checklist.md

@@ -1,88 +1,88 @@
-# Review Checklist
-
-## Comprehensive Review Checklist
-
-| Category | Key Questions |
-|----------|---------------|
-| **Design** | Does it fit existing patterns? Right abstraction level? |
-| **Logic** | Edge cases handled? Race conditions? Null checks? |
-| **Security** | Input validated? Auth checked? Secrets safe? |
-| **Performance** | N+1 queries? Memory leaks? Caching needed? |
-| **Tests** | Adequate coverage? Edge cases tested? Mocks appropriate? |
-| **Naming** | Clear, consistent, intention-revealing? |
-| **Error Handling** | Errors caught? Meaningful messages? Logged? |
-| **Documentation** | Public APIs documented? Complex logic explained? |
-
-## Review Process
-
-### 1. Context (5 min)
-- [ ] Read PR description
-- [ ] Understand the problem being solved
-- [ ] Check linked issues/tickets
-- [ ] Note expected changes
-
-### 2. Structure (10 min)
-- [ ] Review file organization
-- [ ] Check architectural fit
-- [ ] Verify design patterns used
-- [ ] Note any breaking changes
-
-### 3. Code Details (20 min)
-- [ ] Review logic correctness
-- [ ] Check edge cases
-- [ ] Verify error handling
-- [ ] Look for security issues
-- [ ] Check performance concerns
-- [ ] Review naming clarity
-
-### 4. Tests (10 min)
-- [ ] Verify test coverage
-- [ ] Check test quality
-- [ ] Look for edge case tests
-- [ ] Ensure mocks are appropriate
-
-### 5. Final Pass (5 min)
-- [ ] Note positive patterns
-- [ ] Prioritize feedback
-- [ ] Write summary
-
-## Category Deep Dive
-
-### Design Questions
-- Does this change belong in this file/module?
-- Is the abstraction level appropriate?
-- Could this be simpler?
-- Does it follow existing patterns?
-- Is it extensible without modification?
-
-### Logic Questions
-- What happens with null/undefined inputs?
-- Are boundary conditions handled?
-- Could there be race conditions?
-- Is the order of operations correct?
-- Are all code paths tested?
-
-### Security Questions
-- Is all user input validated?
-- Are SQL queries parameterized?
-- Is output properly encoded?
-- Are secrets handled safely?
-- Is authentication checked?
-- Is authorization enforced?
-
-### Performance Questions
-- Are there N+1 query patterns?
-- Is data fetched efficiently?
-- Are expensive operations cached?
-- Could this cause memory leaks?
-- Is pagination implemented?
-
-## Quick Reference
-
-| Review Focus | Time % |
-|--------------|--------|
-| Context & PR description | 10% |
-| Architecture & design | 20% |
-| Code logic & details | 40% |
-| Tests & coverage | 20% |
-| Final review & summary | 10% |
+# Review Checklist
+
+## Comprehensive Review Checklist
+
+| Category | Key Questions |
+|----------|---------------|
+| **Design** | Does it fit existing patterns? Right abstraction level? |
+| **Logic** | Edge cases handled? Race conditions? Null checks? |
+| **Security** | Input validated? Auth checked? Secrets safe? |
+| **Performance** | N+1 queries? Memory leaks? Caching needed? |
+| **Tests** | Adequate coverage? Edge cases tested? Mocks appropriate? |
+| **Naming** | Clear, consistent, intention-revealing? |
+| **Error Handling** | Errors caught? Meaningful messages? Logged? |
+| **Documentation** | Public APIs documented? Complex logic explained? |
+
+## Review Process
+
+### 1. Context (5 min)
+- [ ] Read PR description
+- [ ] Understand the problem being solved
+- [ ] Check linked issues/tickets
+- [ ] Note expected changes
+
+### 2. Structure (10 min)
+- [ ] Review file organization
+- [ ] Check architectural fit
+- [ ] Verify design patterns used
+- [ ] Note any breaking changes
+
+### 3. Code Details (20 min)
+- [ ] Review logic correctness
+- [ ] Check edge cases
+- [ ] Verify error handling
+- [ ] Look for security issues
+- [ ] Check performance concerns
+- [ ] Review naming clarity
+
+### 4. Tests (10 min)
+- [ ] Verify test coverage
+- [ ] Check test quality
+- [ ] Look for edge case tests
+- [ ] Ensure mocks are appropriate
+
+### 5. Final Pass (5 min)
+- [ ] Note positive patterns
+- [ ] Prioritize feedback
+- [ ] Write summary
+
+## Category Deep Dive
+
+### Design Questions
+- Does this change belong in this file/module?
+- Is the abstraction level appropriate?
+- Could this be simpler?
+- Does it follow existing patterns?
+- Is it extensible without modification?
+
+### Logic Questions
+- What happens with null/undefined inputs?
+- Are boundary conditions handled?
+- Could there be race conditions?
+- Is the order of operations correct?
+- Are all code paths tested?
+
+### Security Questions
+- Is all user input validated?
+- Are SQL queries parameterized?
+- Is output properly encoded?
+- Are secrets handled safely?
+- Is authentication checked?
+- Is authorization enforced?
+
+### Performance Questions
+- Are there N+1 query patterns?
+- Is data fetched efficiently?
+- Are expensive operations cached?
+- Could this cause memory leaks?
+- Is pagination implemented?
+
+## Quick Reference
+
+| Review Focus | Time % |
+|--------------|--------|
+| Context & PR description | 10% |
+| Architecture & design | 20% |
+| Code logic & details | 40% |
+| Tests & coverage | 20% |
+| Final review & summary | 10% |