omgkit 2.1.0 → 2.2.0

package/plugin/skills/methodology/receiving-code-review/SKILL.md

@@ -1,41 +1,553 @@
 ---
 name: receiving-code-review
-description: Receiving code review feedback. Use when handling review comments.
+description: Handle code review feedback professionally and productively to improve code quality
+category: methodology
+triggers:
+  - receiving review
+  - code review feedback
+  - review comments
+  - addressing feedback
+  - PR feedback
+  - review response
+  - handling criticism
 ---
 
-# Receiving Code Review Skill
+# Receiving Code Review
 
-## Mindset
-- Feedback is about code, not you
-- Reviewers want to help
-- Every comment is an opportunity
+Handle **code review feedback** professionally and productively to improve code quality and grow as a developer. This skill provides frameworks for processing feedback, responding appropriately, and learning from reviews.
 
-## Response Types
+## Purpose
 
-### Agree
+Turn code reviews into growth opportunities:
+
+- Process feedback objectively without defensiveness
+- Distinguish between required changes and suggestions
+- Respond to comments professionally and clearly
+- Learn patterns and improve from feedback
+- Maintain productive reviewer relationships
+- Track and address all feedback systematically
+- Extract maximum learning value from reviews
+
+## Features
+
+### 1. The Feedback Processing Framework
+
+```markdown
+## Receiving Code Review Mindset
+
+┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
+│                      CODE REVIEW FEEDBACK MODEL                          │
+├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
+│                                                                         │
+│  REMEMBER: Feedback is about the CODE, not about YOU                    │
+│                                                                         │
+│  ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐   │
+│  │                    FEEDBACK RECEIVED                             │   │
+│  └──────────────────────────┬──────────────────────────────────────┘   │
+│                             │                                           │
+│                             ▼                                           │
+│  ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐   │
+│  │              1. PAUSE - Don't React Immediately                  │   │
+│  │                 Read carefully, understand fully                 │   │
+│  └──────────────────────────┬──────────────────────────────────────┘   │
+│                             │                                           │
+│                             ▼                                           │
+│  ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐   │
+│  │              2. CATEGORIZE - What type of feedback?              │   │
+│  │                 Required │ Suggested │ Question │ FYI           │   │
+│  └──────────────────────────┬──────────────────────────────────────┘   │
+│                             │                                           │
+│                             ▼                                           │
+│  ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐   │
+│  │              3. RESPOND - Acknowledge and address                │   │
+│  │                 Agree │ Discuss │ Clarify                       │   │
+│  └──────────────────────────┬──────────────────────────────────────┘   │
+│                             │                                           │
+│                             ▼                                           │
+│  ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐   │
+│  │              4. LEARN - Extract patterns and lessons             │   │
+│  │                 Document │ Practice │ Share                     │   │
+│  └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘   │
+│                                                                         │
+└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
+```
+
+### 2. Feedback Categorization
+
+```typescript
+/**
+ * Categorize review comments to prioritize response
+ */
+
+type FeedbackCategory =
+  | 'blocking'    // Must fix before merge
+  | 'suggestion'  // Recommended improvement
+  | 'question'    // Needs clarification
+  | 'nitpick'     // Minor style issue
+  | 'praise'      // Positive feedback
+  | 'fyi';        // Informational
+
+interface ReviewComment {
+  id: string;
+  author: string;
+  content: string;
+  file?: string;
+  line?: number;
+  category: FeedbackCategory;
+  status: 'pending' | 'addressed' | 'wontfix' | 'discussing';
+}
+
+function categorizeComment(comment: string, context: ReviewContext): FeedbackCategory {
+  // Blocking indicators
+  const blockingPatterns = [
+    /must|required|needs to|has to|should not/i,
+    /security|vulnerability|bug|broken/i,
+    /please fix|critical|blocking/i
+  ];
+
+  // Question indicators
+  const questionPatterns = [
+    /\?$/,
+    /^(why|what|how|could you|can you|would you)/i,
+    /wondering|curious|not sure/i
+  ];
+
+  // Suggestion indicators
+  const suggestionPatterns = [
+    /consider|might want|could|maybe|alternatively/i,
+    /^(nit|minor|optional|suggestion)/i
+  ];
+
+  // Praise indicators
+  const praisePatterns = [
+    /nice|great|good|love|excellent|clever|clean/i,
+    /👍|🎉|✨|💯/
+  ];
+
+  if (blockingPatterns.some(p => p.test(comment))) return 'blocking';
+  if (questionPatterns.some(p => p.test(comment))) return 'question';
+  if (praisePatterns.some(p => p.test(comment))) return 'praise';
+  if (suggestionPatterns.some(p => p.test(comment))) return 'suggestion';
+
+  return 'suggestion'; // Default to suggestion
+}
+
+// Priority order for addressing comments
+const addressingPriority = [
+  'blocking',   // Fix these first
+  'question',   // Answer to unblock discussion
+  'suggestion', // Consider and respond
+  'nitpick',    // Fix if easy, discuss if not
+  'praise',     // Thank the reviewer
+  'fyi'         // Acknowledge
+];
 ```
-Good catch! Fixed in abc123.
+
+### 3. Response Templates
+
+```typescript
+/**
+ * Professional response templates for different feedback types
+ */
+
+const responseTemplates = {
+  // Agreement - Simple and direct
+  agree: {
+    simple: "Good catch! Fixed in {commit}.",
+    withContext: "Agreed - I missed this case. Fixed in {commit}.",
+    withThanks: "Thanks for catching this! Fixed in {commit}."
+  },
+
+  // Disagreement - Respectful with reasoning
+  disagree: {
+    withAlternative: `
+I considered this approach, but chose the current implementation because:
+- {reason1}
+- {reason2}
+
+What do you think about keeping it as-is given these trade-offs?`,
+
+    withData: `
+I ran some benchmarks on both approaches:
+- Current: {metric1}
+- Suggested: {metric2}
+
+The current approach seems better for our use case. Thoughts?`,
+
+    partial: `
+Good point about {aspect}. I've addressed that part.
+
+For {other_aspect}, I'd prefer to keep the current approach because {reason}.
+Let me know if you feel strongly about changing it.`
+  },
+
+  // Clarification - Ask specific questions
+  clarify: {
+    needsMore: "Could you elaborate on {specific_point}? I want to make sure I understand the concern.",
+    example: "Do you have an example of the pattern you'd prefer? That would help me understand.",
+    context: "I may be missing some context - could you explain why {approach} is preferred here?"
+  },
+
+  // Questions - Answer directly
+  answer: {
+    withReason: "Great question! I chose this because {reason}.",
+    withTradeoff: "Good catch - there's a trade-off here. {explanation}. I went with this approach because {reasoning}.",
+    withDoc: "This is documented in {location}. The reason is {explanation}."
+  },
+
+  // Deferral - Valid reasons to defer
+  defer: {
+    scopeCreep: "That's a good idea! It's outside the scope of this PR - I'll create a follow-up issue: {issue_link}",
+    needsDiscussion: "This deserves a broader discussion. Let's sync about it in {meeting/channel}.",
+    complexChange: "Agreed this should change, but it's a larger refactor. Created {issue_link} to track."
+  }
+};
+
+// Example responses
+const exampleResponses = {
+  // Reviewer: "This could be simplified using Array.map instead of the for loop"
+  agreeAndFix: "Good call! Refactored to use map - much cleaner. Fixed in abc123.",
+
+  // Reviewer: "Why not use a switch statement here?"
+  disagreeWithReason: `
+I considered a switch, but the if-else works better here because:
+- The conditions aren't simple value comparisons
+- We need to check ranges (age > 18)
+- The logic may expand to more complex conditions
+
+Happy to discuss if you see issues with this approach.`,
+
+  // Reviewer: "Consider adding error handling"
+  partialAgree: `
+Good point! Added try/catch for the network calls.
+
+For the local operations, I've kept them without explicit try/catch since errors there indicate bugs we'd want to surface immediately. Let me know if you'd prefer explicit handling there too.`
+};
 ```
 
-### Discuss
+### 4. Addressing Comments Systematically
+
+```typescript
+/**
+ * Process all comments systematically
+ */
+
+interface ReviewSession {
+  prId: string;
+  comments: ReviewComment[];
+  status: 'in_progress' | 'complete' | 'blocked';
+}
+
+class ReviewResponseManager {
+  private session: ReviewSession;
+
+  async processAllComments(): Promise<void> {
+    // 1. Read all comments first (don't start responding immediately)
+    const allComments = await this.fetchAllComments();
+
+    // 2. Categorize and sort by priority
+    const categorized = allComments
+      .map(c => ({ ...c, category: categorizeComment(c.content) }))
+      .sort((a, b) =>
+        addressingPriority.indexOf(a.category) -
+        addressingPriority.indexOf(b.category)
+      );
+
+    // 3. Group related comments
+    const grouped = this.groupRelatedComments(categorized);
+
+    // 4. Address each group
+    for (const group of grouped) {
+      await this.addressCommentGroup(group);
+    }
+
+    // 5. Post summary update
+    await this.postSummaryUpdate();
+  }
+
+  private async addressCommentGroup(comments: ReviewComment[]): Promise<void> {
+    // Address the primary comment
+    const primary = comments[0];
+
+    switch (primary.category) {
+      case 'blocking':
+        await this.fixAndRespond(primary);
+        break;
+      case 'question':
+        await this.answerQuestion(primary);
+        break;
+      case 'suggestion':
+        await this.considerSuggestion(primary);
+        break;
+      case 'nitpick':
+        await this.handleNitpick(primary);
+        break;
+      case 'praise':
+        await this.acknowledgepraise(primary);
+        break;
+    }
+
+    // Mark as addressed
+    primary.status = 'addressed';
+  }
+
+  private async postSummaryUpdate(): Promise<void> {
+    const addressed = this.session.comments.filter(c => c.status === 'addressed');
+    const pending = this.session.comments.filter(c => c.status === 'pending');
+    const wontfix = this.session.comments.filter(c => c.status === 'wontfix');
+
+    await this.postComment(`
+## Review Response Summary
+
+✅ Addressed: ${addressed.length} comments
+⏳ Pending discussion: ${pending.length} comments
+🔜 Deferred: ${wontfix.length} comments (see follow-up issues)
+
+Ready for another look when you have time!
+    `);
+  }
+}
 ```
-I considered that, but chose X because [reason].
-What do you think about [alternative]?
+
+### 5. Learning from Reviews
+
+```typescript
+/**
+ * Extract learning value from reviews
+ */
+
+interface ReviewLesson {
+  category: string;
+  pattern: string;
+  example: string;
+  prevention: string;
+}
+
+class ReviewLearningSystem {
+  private lessons: ReviewLesson[] = [];
+
+  extractLessons(review: ReviewSession): ReviewLesson[] {
+    const lessons: ReviewLesson[] = [];
+
+    for (const comment of review.comments) {
+      if (comment.category === 'blocking' || comment.category === 'suggestion') {
+        const lesson = this.analyzeForLesson(comment);
+        if (lesson) {
+          lessons.push(lesson);
+        }
+      }
+    }
+
+    return lessons;
+  }
+
+  private analyzeForLesson(comment: ReviewComment): ReviewLesson | null {
+    // Common lesson patterns
+    const patterns = {
+      security: {
+        triggers: ['injection', 'xss', 'auth', 'security', 'sanitize'],
+        category: 'Security',
+        prevention: 'Use parameterized queries, validate input, encode output'
+      },
+      performance: {
+        triggers: ['n+1', 'loop', 'inefficient', 'slow', 'memory'],
+        category: 'Performance',
+        prevention: 'Profile before optimizing, batch operations, use appropriate data structures'
+      },
+      errorHandling: {
+        triggers: ['error', 'exception', 'try', 'catch', 'handle'],
+        category: 'Error Handling',
+        prevention: 'Always handle errors, use typed errors, log appropriately'
+      },
+      testing: {
+        triggers: ['test', 'coverage', 'edge case', 'mock'],
+        category: 'Testing',
+        prevention: 'Test edge cases, use meaningful assertions, avoid flaky tests'
+      },
+      naming: {
+        triggers: ['name', 'unclear', 'confusing', 'rename'],
+        category: 'Naming',
+        prevention: 'Use descriptive names, follow conventions, be consistent'
+      }
+    };
+
+    for (const [key, pattern] of Object.entries(patterns)) {
+      if (pattern.triggers.some(t =>
+        comment.content.toLowerCase().includes(t)
+      )) {
+        return {
+          category: pattern.category,
+          pattern: comment.content,
+          example: comment.file ? `${comment.file}:${comment.line}` : 'N/A',
+          prevention: pattern.prevention
+        };
+      }
+    }
+
+    return null;
+  }
+
+  // Track recurring feedback
+  trackPatterns(): RecurringPattern[] {
+    const patternCounts = new Map<string, number>();
+
+    for (const lesson of this.lessons) {
+      const key = lesson.category;
+      patternCounts.set(key, (patternCounts.get(key) || 0) + 1);
+    }
+
+    return Array.from(patternCounts.entries())
+      .filter(([_, count]) => count >= 2)
+      .map(([category, count]) => ({
+        category,
+        count,
+        suggestion: `Focus on improving ${category.toLowerCase()} skills`
+      }));
+  }
+}
 ```
 
-### Clarify
+### 6. Common Anti-Patterns to Avoid
+
+```markdown
+## Review Response Anti-Patterns
+
+### ❌ DON'T: Defensive Responses
+
+Bad:
+> "Well, it works fine on my machine and I've tested it extensively."
+
+Good:
+> "I see the issue now - I was testing in a different environment. Fixed in abc123."
+
+
+### ❌ DON'T: Ignoring Comments
+
+Bad:
+> *No response, just mark as resolved*
+
+Good:
+> "Addressed this by extracting the logic into a helper function. The tests now cover the edge case too."
+
+
+### ❌ DON'T: Dismissive Responses
+
+Bad:
+> "That's just a style preference, not important."
+
+Good:
+> "I see the benefit for consistency. Changed to match the team style."
+
+
+### ❌ DON'T: Over-Explaining
+
+Bad:
+> *Three paragraphs explaining why you chose a variable name*
+
+Good:
+> "Renamed to userAccountStatus - clearer. Good catch."
+
+
+### ❌ DON'T: Passive-Aggressive
+
+Bad:
+> "I guess we can do it your way if you insist..."
+
+Good:
+> "That approach does handle the edge case better. Updated."
+
+
+### ✅ DO: Be Grateful
+
+Good:
+> "Thanks for the thorough review! I learned a new pattern from your suggestion about X."
+
+
+### ✅ DO: Take Ownership
+
+Good:
+> "You're right, I should have caught this. Added a test to prevent regression."
 ```
-Could you elaborate on [specific point]?
-I want to make sure I understand.
+
+## Use Cases
+
+### Handling a Tough Review
+
+```typescript
+// Scenario: PR receives 20+ comments, some critical
+
+async function handleToughReview(prId: string): Promise<void> {
+  const manager = new ReviewResponseManager(prId);
+
+  // Step 1: Don't panic, read everything first
+  const allComments = await manager.fetchAllComments();
+  console.log(`Received ${allComments.length} comments`);
+
+  // Step 2: Categorize to understand scope
+  const breakdown = categorizeAll(allComments);
+  console.log(`
+    Blocking: ${breakdown.blocking}
+    Questions: ${breakdown.questions}
+    Suggestions: ${breakdown.suggestions}
+    Nitpicks: ${breakdown.nitpicks}
+  `);
+
+  // Step 3: Address blocking issues first
+  for (const blocking of breakdown.blocking) {
+    await fixBlockingIssue(blocking);
+  }
+
+  // Step 4: Answer questions to unblock discussion
+  for (const question of breakdown.questions) {
+    await answerQuestion(question);
+  }
+
+  // Step 5: Address suggestions thoughtfully
+  for (const suggestion of breakdown.suggestions) {
+    if (suggestion.isValid) {
+      await implementSuggestion(suggestion);
+    } else {
+      await explainAlternative(suggestion);
+    }
+  }
+
+  // Step 6: Quick fixes for nitpicks
+  for (const nitpick of breakdown.nitpicks) {
+    await quickFix(nitpick);
+  }
+
+  // Step 7: Post summary and re-request review
+  await postSummary();
+  await requestReReview();
+}
 ```
 
-## Process
-1. Read all comments first
-2. Address each comment
-3. Mark resolved when fixed
-4. Re-request review
+## Best Practices
+
+### Do's
+
+- **Read all comments before responding** - understand the full picture
+- **Categorize by priority** - blocking issues first
+- **Respond to every comment** - even if just acknowledging
+- **Be specific in responses** - reference commit hashes
+- **Thank reviewers** for their time and insights
+- **Learn from feedback** - track patterns
+- **Follow up promptly** - don't let PRs stale
+- **Ask for clarification** when needed
+
+### Don'ts
+
+- Don't take feedback personally
+- Don't respond defensively or emotionally
+- Don't ignore comments without explanation
+- Don't mark as resolved without addressing
+- Don't argue about preferences endlessly
+- Don't dismiss nitpicks dismissively
+- Don't forget to re-request review
+- Don't delay addressing feedback
+
+## References
 
-## Anti-Patterns
-- Defensive reactions
-- Ignoring comments
-- Changing without acknowledgment
+- [The Art of Receiving Code Reviews](https://mtlynch.io/code-review-love/)
+- [How to Make Good Code Reviews Better](https://stackoverflow.blog/2019/09/30/how-to-make-good-code-reviews-better/)
+- [Google Code Review Guidelines](https://google.github.io/eng-practices/review/)