codexspec 0.5.2__tar.gz → 0.5.4__tar.gz

{codexspec-0.5.2 → codexspec-0.5.4}/PKG-INFO

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 Metadata-Version: 2.4
 Name: codexspec
-Version: 0.5.2
+Version: 0.5.4
 Summary: CodexSpec - A Spec-Driven Development (SDD) toolkit for Claude Code
 Project-URL: Homepage, https://github.com/Zts0hg/codexspec
 Project-URL: Repository, https://github.com/Zts0hg/codexspec
@@ -485,6 +485,13 @@ After initialization, these slash commands are available in Claude Code:
 | `/codexspec:commit-staged` | Generate commit message from staged changes with session context awareness |
 | `/codexspec:pr` | Generate structured PR (GitHub) or MR (GitLab) descriptions with platform auto-detection |
 
+#### Code Review Commands
+
+| Command | Description |
+|---------|-------------|
+| `/codexspec:review-python-code` | Review Python code for PEP 8 compliance, type safety, engineering robustness, and constitution alignment |
+| `/codexspec:review-react-code` | Review React/TypeScript code for component architecture, hooks compliance, state management, performance, and constitution alignment |
+
 ## Workflow Overview
 
 ```

{codexspec-0.5.2 → codexspec-0.5.4}/README.md

@@ -440,6 +440,13 @@ After initialization, these slash commands are available in Claude Code:
 | `/codexspec:commit-staged` | Generate commit message from staged changes with session context awareness |
 | `/codexspec:pr` | Generate structured PR (GitHub) or MR (GitLab) descriptions with platform auto-detection |
 
+#### Code Review Commands
+
+| Command | Description |
+|---------|-------------|
+| `/codexspec:review-python-code` | Review Python code for PEP 8 compliance, type safety, engineering robustness, and constitution alignment |
+| `/codexspec:review-react-code` | Review React/TypeScript code for component architecture, hooks compliance, state management, performance, and constitution alignment |
+
 ## Workflow Overview
 
 ```

{codexspec-0.5.2 → codexspec-0.5.4}/pyproject.toml

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 [project]
 name = "codexspec"
-version = "0.5.2"
+version = "0.5.4"
 description = "CodexSpec - A Spec-Driven Development (SDD) toolkit for Claude Code"
 readme = "README.md"
 requires-python = ">=3.11"

{codexspec-0.5.2 → codexspec-0.5.4}/src/codexspec/__init__.py

@@ -348,6 +348,7 @@ def list_commands() -> None:
         "core": [],
         "enhanced": [],
         "git": [],
+        "review": [],
     }
     for cmd in metadata:
         cat = cmd["category"]

{codexspec-0.5.2 → codexspec-0.5.4}/src/codexspec/commands/installer.py

@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ class CommandMetadata(TypedDict):
         name: Command name without prefix (e.g., "constitution")
         display_name: Full display name (e.g., "/codexspec:constitution")
         description: Command description for list-commands output
-        category: Command category ("core", "enhanced", or "git")
+        category: Command category ("core", "enhanced", "git", or "review")
         file_name: Template file name (e.g., "constitution.md")
     """
 
@@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ def get_commands_metadata() -> list[CommandMetadata]:
 
     Returns:
         List of CommandMetadata dictionaries sorted by category priority:
-        core (9) -> enhanced (4) -> git (3)
+        core (9) -> enhanced (4) -> git (2) -> review (2)
     """
     return [
         # Core Commands (9)
@@ -153,6 +153,21 @@ def get_commands_metadata() -> list[CommandMetadata]:
             "category": "git",
             "file_name": "pr.md",
         },
+        # Code Review Commands (2)
+        {
+            "name": "review-python-code",
+            "display_name": "/codexspec:review-python-code",
+            "description": "审查 Python 代码的 PEP 8 合规性、类型安全、工程健壮性和宪法一致性",
+            "category": "review",
+            "file_name": "review-python-code.md",
+        },
+        {
+            "name": "review-react-code",
+            "display_name": "/codexspec:review-react-code",
+            "description": "审查 React/TypeScript 代码的组件架构、Hooks 规范、状态管理、性能表现和宪法一致性",
+            "category": "review",
+            "file_name": "review-react-code.md",
+        },
     ]
 
 

{codexspec-0.5.2 → codexspec-0.5.4}/src/codexspec/translator.py

@@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ _CLI_MESSAGES_EN = {
         "category_core": "Core Commands ({count})",
         "category_enhanced": "Enhanced Commands ({count})",
         "category_git": "Git Workflow ({count})",
+        "category_review": "Code Review ({count})",
         # Success panel
         "success_title": "Success",
         "success_message": "CodexSpec project initialized successfully!",
@@ -92,6 +93,7 @@ _CLI_MESSAGES_EN = {
         "category_core": "Core Commands ({count})",
         "category_enhanced": "Enhanced Commands ({count})",
         "category_git": "Git Workflow ({count})",
+        "category_review": "Code Review ({count})",
         "no_project": "No CodexSpec project found in current directory.",
         "run_init": "Run codexspec init to create a new project.",
         "usage_hint": "Use /codexspec:<command> to invoke these commands",

{codexspec-0.5.2 → codexspec-0.5.4}/templates/commands/pr.md

@@ -341,9 +341,65 @@ Example: `--sections summary,changes,testing`
 8. **Links**: Use `[text](url)` format for references
 9. **Task Lists**: Use `- [ ]` and `- [x]` for verification checklists
 
-### GitHub PR Format
+### Code Block Nesting Rules (CRITICAL)
+
+When the PR content itself contains code blocks (e.g., showing command examples, code snippets, or diff output), you **MUST** handle nesting correctly to prevent unclosed code blocks:
+
+**Rule 1: Use more backticks for outer blocks**
+When nesting code blocks, the outer block must use more backticks than the inner block:
+
+- Outer: 4+ backticks (````)
+- Inner: 3 backticks (```)
 
+**Rule 2: Never mix same-level backticks**
+Using 3 backticks for both outer and inner blocks will cause premature closing and broken formatting.
+
+**Example - Correct Nesting:**
+
+````markdown
+### How to Verify
+
+Run the following command:
+```bash
+pytest tests/auth/
+```
+
+Expected output:
+```
+=== test session starts ===
+collected 5 items
+```
+````
+
+**Example - Incorrect (will break):**
+
+```markdown
+### How to Verify
+```bash
+pytest tests/auth/
+```
+
+```  ← This closes the first block, leaving rest orphaned
+```
+
+**Rule 3: For terminal output mode**
+When outputting to terminal, wrap the entire PR in a code block with 4+ backticks:
+
+````text
 ```markdown
+[PR content with internal ``` code blocks ```]
+```
+````
+
+**Rule 4: Backtick escaping in content**
+If you need to display literal backticks (`` ` ``) in PR content without starting a code block:
+
+- For single backtick: Use inline code syntax `` ` `` (wrap in single backticks)
+- For multiple backticks: Use HTML entity ``` or wrap in more backticks than displayed
+
+### GitHub PR Format
+
+````markdown
 ## type(scope): description
 
 > Brief summary of what this PR accomplishes (1-2 sentences)
@@ -397,11 +453,11 @@ Example: `--sections summary,changes,testing`
 ---
 *Related: #[issue-number]* (if applicable)
 
-```
+````
 
 ### GitLab MR Format
 
-```markdown
+````markdown
 ## type(scope): description
 
 > Brief summary of what this MR accomplishes (1-2 sentences)
@@ -448,37 +504,43 @@ Example: `--sections summary,changes,testing`
 
 /label ~"[label]" @reviewer (if applicable)
 
-```
+````
 
 ### Section Content Guidelines
 
 #### Summary Section
+
 - Keep to 2-3 sentences maximum
 - Answer "What" and "Why" (not "How")
 - Use plain language accessible to all reviewers
 
 #### Changes Section
+
 - Use tables for file changes (improves readability)
 - Group related changes logically
 - Include change type: Added, Modified, Deleted, Renamed
 
 #### Testing Section
+
 - Use task lists for test coverage status
 - Include exact commands to run tests
 - Note any special test requirements
 
 #### How to Verify Section
+
 - Use numbered list for step-by-step verification
 - Include specific commands to run
 - Be precise and actionable (e.g., "Run `pytest tests/auth/`")
 - Include expected outcomes where helpful
 
 #### Checklist Section
+
 - Use GitHub/GitLab task list syntax `- [ ]`
 - Include project-specific checklist items
 - Focus on author self-confirmation before merge
 
 #### Notes Section
+
 - Highlight breaking changes with `**Breaking Change:**` prefix
 - Include migration instructions if needed
 - Link to related issues/PRs
@@ -497,26 +559,32 @@ Example: `--sections summary,changes,testing`
 ## Edge Cases
 
 ### EC-001: Branch Up to Date with Target
+
 **Scenario**: No commits ahead of target branch
 **Response**: "No changes detected between current branch and [target]. Nothing to generate."
 
 ### EC-002: Invalid Target Branch
+
 **Scenario**: Target branch doesn't exist
 **Response**: "Target branch '[branch]' not found. Please verify the branch name."
 
 ### EC-003: Not a Git Repository
+
 **Scenario**: Command run outside git repo
 **Response**: "Not a git repository. Please run this command from within a git repository."
 
 ### EC-004b: Invalid Spec Path
+
 **Scenario**: `--spec` path doesn't exist
 **Response**: "Spec '[path]' not found. Available specs: [list specs in .codexspec/specs/]"
 
 ### EC-005: Detached HEAD State
+
 **Scenario**: Repository in detached HEAD
 **Response**: "Cannot determine current branch. Please checkout a branch before generating PR description."
 
 ### EC-006: No Remote Configured
+
 **Scenario**: No git remote configured
 **Handling**: Use GitHub terminology with warning: "No remote configured. Defaulting to GitHub terminology."
 
@@ -546,6 +614,7 @@ Example: `--sections summary,changes,testing`
 This ensures users see the raw markdown source code, not the rendered output. Users can then copy the content inside the code block and paste it directly into GitHub/GitLab.
 
 ### File Output (`--output`)
+
 When saving to a file, output the raw markdown content directly (without code block wrapper). The file will contain the actual PR description ready for use.
 
 ## Important Notes

codexspec-0.5.4/templates/commands/review-python-code.md

@@ -0,0 +1,225 @@
+---
+description: Review Python code for PEP 8 compliance, type safety, engineering robustness, and constitution alignment
+argument-hint: |
+  Path to Python file or directory to review
+
+  Examples:
+  - `src/codexspec/` - Review entire package
+  - `src/codexspec/__init__.py` - Review single file
+  - `src/ tests/` - Review multiple paths
+allowed-tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Bash(ruff check:*), Bash(mypy:*), Bash(python -m py_compile:*)
+---
+
+# Python Code Reviewer
+
+## Language Preference
+
+**IMPORTANT**: Before proceeding, read the project's language configuration from `.codexspec/config.yml`.
+
+- If `language.output` is set to a language other than "en", respond and generate all content in that language
+- If not configured or set to "en", use English as default
+- Technical terms (e.g., API, Type Hints, PEP 8) may remain in English when appropriate
+- All user-facing messages, questions, and generated documents should use the configured language
+
+## User Input
+
+```text
+$ARGUMENTS
+```
+
+You **MUST** consider the user input before proceeding (if not empty).
+
+## Role
+
+You are the **Chief Architect** for this Python project. Your responsibility is to conduct rigorous code reviews that identify logic defects, performance bottlenecks, type safety issues, and violations of engineering best practices.
+
+## Instructions
+
+Perform a comprehensive code review of Python files at the specified path. This command combines static analysis tools with architectural review to provide actionable feedback.
+
+### File Resolution
+
+- **With argument**: Treat `$ARGUMENTS` as the path(s) to review (supports space-separated multiple paths)
+- **Without argument**: Review the main source directory (default: `src/`)
+
+### Execution Steps
+
+1. **Initialize Review Context**
+   - [ ] Parse target paths from user input
+   - [ ] Verify paths exist and contain Python files
+   - [ ] Load `.codexspec/memory/constitution.md` for project quality standards (if exists)
+
+2. **Run Static Analysis**
+   - [ ] Execute `ruff check {paths}` for linting results
+   - [ ] Execute `mypy {paths}` for type checking results
+   - [ ] Capture and categorize all tool outputs
+
+3. **Load and Analyze Code**
+   - [ ] Read all Python files in target paths
+   - [ ] Identify module structure and dependencies
+   - [ ] Map code patterns against review dimensions
+
+4. **Review Dimension 1: Pythonic & KISS Principle**
+   - [ ] Detect over-engineering (unnecessary classes when functions suffice)
+   - [ ] Verify preference for built-in functions and standard library (`pathlib`, `itertools`, `collections`)
+   - [ ] Check adherence to "Simple is better than complex"
+   - [ ] Validate docstring usage (module/function docstrings vs. inline comments)
+
+5. **Review Dimension 2: Type Safety & Explicitness**
+   - [ ] Check type annotation completeness (function parameters, return types)
+   - [ ] Identify overly broad exception handling (`except Exception:`)
+   - [ ] Verify exception context preservation (`raise ... from err`)
+   - [ ] Assess dependency injection patterns for testability
+
+6. **Review Dimension 3: Engineering Robustness**
+   - [ ] Verify resource management (`with` context managers for files/connections)
+   - [ ] Check async/await usage patterns (blocking event loop risks)
+   - [ ] Validate logging practices (`logging` module vs. `print` statements)
+   - [ ] Review log level appropriateness
+
+7. **Constitution Alignment** (if constitution exists)
+   - [ ] Cross-reference findings against constitution MUST principles
+   - [ ] Identify violations of project-specific quality standards
+   - [ ] Flag deviations from established coding conventions
+
+8. **Assign Severity Levels**
+   - [ ] **CRITICAL**: Constitution MUST violations, logic bugs, security vulnerabilities
+   - [ ] **HIGH**: Type safety gaps, ruff/mypy errors, resource leaks
+   - [ ] **MEDIUM**: Design pattern improvements, refactoring long functions, missing type annotations
+   - [ ] **LOW**: Readability improvements, Pythonic syntax sugar
+
+9. **Generate Report**
+   - [ ] Compile all findings into structured report
+   - [ ] Include specific code locations and refactoring suggestions
+   - [ ] Calculate quality scores per dimension
+
+### Report Template
+
+````markdown
+# Python Code Review Report
+
+## Meta Information
+- **Target**: {paths}
+- **Review Date**: {date}
+- **Reviewer Role**: Chief Architect
+
+## Summary
+- **Overall Status**: ✅ Pass / ⚠️ Needs Work / ❌ Fail
+- **Quality Score**: X/100
+- **One-line Assessment**: {concise quality summary}
+
+## Static Analysis Results
+
+| Tool | Status | Issues | Details |
+|------|--------|--------|---------|
+| ruff | ✅/⚠️/❌ | {count} | {summary or "No issues found"} |
+| mypy | ✅/⚠️/❌ | {count} | {summary or "No issues found"} |
+
+## Dimension Analysis
+
+| Dimension | Score | Status | Key Findings |
+|-----------|-------|--------|--------------|
+| Pythonic & KISS | X/100 | ✅/⚠️/❌ | {summary} |
+| Type Safety & Explicitness | X/100 | ✅/⚠️/❌ | {summary} |
+| Engineering Robustness | X/100 | ✅/⚠️/❌ | {summary} |
+
+## Constitution Alignment
+
+> [!NOTE]
+> If no constitution exists, state "No project constitution found - using general Python best practices."
+
+| Principle | Status | Notes |
+|-----------|--------|-------|
+| {principle name} | ✅/⚠️/❌ | {alignment assessment} |
+
+## Detailed Findings
+
+### Critical Issues (CRITICAL)
+*Must fix before merge - Constitution violations, logic bugs, security vulnerabilities*
+
+- [ ] **[CODE-001]**: `{filename}:{line_number}` - {issue description}
+  - **Impact**: {why this matters}
+  - **Suggestion**:
+    ```python
+    {refactored code snippet}
+    ```
+
+### Warnings (HIGH)
+*Should fix - Type safety, tool errors, resource management*
+
+- [ ] **[CODE-002]**: `{filename}:{line_number}` - {issue description}
+  - **Impact**: {potential risk}
+  - **Suggestion**:
+    ```python
+    {refactored code snippet}
+    ```
+
+### Warnings (MEDIUM)
+*Consider fixing - Design improvements, refactoring opportunities*
+
+- [ ] **[CODE-003]**: `{filename}:{line_number}` - {issue description}
+  - **Suggestion**: {improvement recommendation}
+
+### Suggestions (LOW)
+*Nice to have - Readability, Pythonic enhancements*
+
+- [ ] **[CODE-004]**: `{filename}:{line_number}` - {enhancement description}
+  - **Benefit**: {value of this change}
+
+## Strengths
+- {highlight 1-2 positive findings in the codebase}
+
+## Recommendations
+
+### Priority 1: Must Fix (Before Merge)
+1. {most critical action}
+2. {second most critical}
+
+### Priority 2: Should Fix (This Sprint)
+1. {important improvement}
+2. {another improvement}
+
+### Priority 3: Nice to Have (Future)
+1. {optional enhancement}
+
+## Scoring Breakdown
+
+| Category | Weight | Score | Weighted |
+|----------|--------|-------|----------|
+| Pythonic & KISS | 30% | X/100 | X |
+| Type Safety | 30% | X/100 | X |
+| Engineering Robustness | 25% | X/100 | X |
+| Constitution Alignment | 15% | X/100 | X |
+| **Total** | **100%** | | **X/100** |
+
+## Available Follow-up Commands
+
+Based on the review result, consider:
+
+### If Issues Found
+- **Direct Fix**: Describe the changes you want (e.g., "Fix CODE-001 and CODE-002") and I will apply the fixes
+- **Re-run Review**: `/codexspec:review-python-code {paths}` - verify fixes after changes
+- **Proceed Anyway**: If issues are acceptable for current iteration
+
+### Next Steps Based on Review Result
+- **Pass**: Code is ready for commit/merge
+- **Needs Work**: Fix HIGH/CRITICAL issues, then re-run review
+- **Fail**: Significant rework required - consider `/codexspec:clarify` for design discussion
+````
+
+### Quality Criteria
+
+Before completing the review, verify:
+
+- [ ] Static analysis tools (ruff, mypy) have been executed
+- [ ] All three review dimensions have been assessed
+- [ ] Constitution alignment has been checked (if constitution exists)
+- [ ] Issues are categorized by severity (CRITICAL/HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW)
+- [ ] Each CRITICAL/HIGH issue has specific code refactoring suggestions
+- [ ] Score reflects actual code quality accurately
+- [ ] Strengths section highlights positive aspects
+- [ ] Recommendations are prioritized and actionable
+
+### Output
+
+Display the review report in the conversation. Optionally save to `.codexspec/reviews/python-code-review-{timestamp}.md` if requested.

codexspec-0.5.4/templates/commands/review-react-code.md

@@ -0,0 +1,233 @@
+---
+description: Review React/TypeScript code for component architecture, hooks compliance, state management, performance, and constitution alignment
+argument-hint: |
+  Path to React/TypeScript file or directory to review
+
+  Examples:
+  - `src/components/` - Review entire components directory
+  - `src/components/Button.tsx` - Review single file
+  - `src/hooks/ src/components/` - Review multiple paths
+allowed-tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Bash(npm run lint:*), Bash(npx eslint:*), Bash(npx tsc --noEmit:*)
+---
+
+# React Code Reviewer
+
+## Language Preference
+
+**IMPORTANT**: Before proceeding, read the project's language configuration from `.codexspec/config.yml`.
+
+- If `language.output` is set to a language other than "en", respond and generate all content in that language
+- If not configured or set to "en", use English as default
+- Technical terms (e.g., JSX, Hooks, Props, State) may remain in English when appropriate
+- All user-facing messages, questions, and generated documents should use the configured language
+
+## User Input
+
+```text
+$ARGUMENTS
+```
+
+You **MUST** consider the user input before proceeding (if not empty).
+
+## Role
+
+You are the **Frontend Chief Architect** for this React/TypeScript project. Your responsibility is to conduct rigorous code reviews that identify component architecture issues, hooks violations, state management problems, performance bottlenecks, and violations of React best practices.
+
+## Instructions
+
+Perform a comprehensive code review of React/TypeScript files at the specified path. This command combines static analysis tools with architectural review to provide actionable feedback.
+
+### File Resolution
+
+- **With argument**: Treat `$ARGUMENTS` as the path(s) to review (supports space-separated multiple paths)
+- **Without argument**: Review the main source directory (default: `src/`)
+
+### Execution Steps
+
+1. **Initialize Review Context**
+   - [ ] Parse target paths from user input
+   - [ ] Verify paths exist and contain React/TypeScript files (`.tsx`, `.ts`, `.jsx`, `.js`)
+   - [ ] Load `.codexspec/memory/constitution.md` for project quality standards (if exists)
+
+2. **Run Static Analysis**
+   - [ ] Execute `npx eslint {paths}` for linting results (if eslint config exists)
+   - [ ] Execute `npx tsc --noEmit` for TypeScript type checking results (if tsconfig exists)
+   - [ ] Capture and categorize all tool outputs
+
+3. **Load and Analyze Code**
+   - [ ] Read all React/TypeScript files in target paths
+   - [ ] Identify component structure and dependencies
+   - [ ] Map code patterns against review dimensions
+
+4. **Review Dimension 1: Component Atomicity & Single Responsibility (SRP)**
+   - [ ] Check if each file contains only one primary component
+   - [ ] Identify components exceeding 200 lines (potential refactoring candidates)
+   - [ ] Verify complex business logic is extracted into custom Hooks
+   - [ ] Validate separation between UI presentation and business logic
+
+5. **Review Dimension 2: Hooks Compliance & Side Effects Management**
+   - [ ] Verify `useEffect` has explicit and complete dependency arrays
+   - [ ] Detect "over-synchronized state" misuse (derived state that should be computed)
+   - [ ] Identify unnecessary `useEffect` usage (when `useMemo` or direct computation suffices)
+   - [ ] Assess stale closure risks in event handlers and async operations
+
+6. **Review Dimension 3: State Management & Data Flow**
+   - [ ] Validate state is "as local as possible" (avoid unnecessary global state)
+   - [ ] Check for excessive prop drilling (consider context or composition)
+   - [ ] Verify props destructuring and default value handling
+   - [ ] Assess async request handling (loading states, error handling, race condition protection)
+
+7. **Review Dimension 4: Performance & Robustness**
+   - [ ] Identify potential unnecessary re-render issues
+   - [ ] Check if functions/objects in render are properly memoized (`useCallback`, `useMemo`)
+   - [ ] Verify null/undefined safety (optional chaining, nullish coalescing)
+   - [ ] Assess usage of `React.memo`, `useMemo`, `useCallback` for optimization
+
+8. **Constitution Alignment** (if constitution exists)
+   - [ ] Cross-reference findings against constitution MUST principles
+   - [ ] Identify violations of project-specific quality standards
+   - [ ] Flag deviations from established coding conventions
+
+9. **Assign Severity Levels**
+   - [ ] **CRITICAL**: Constitution MUST violations, logic bugs, security vulnerabilities, memory leaks
+   - [ ] **HIGH**: Hooks violations, ESLint/TypeScript errors, performance hazards
+   - [ ] **MEDIUM**: Design pattern improvements, refactoring large components, state management improvements
+   - [ ] **LOW**: Readability improvements, code style enhancements
+
+10. **Generate Report**
+    - [ ] Compile all findings into structured report
+    - [ ] Include specific code locations and refactoring suggestions
+    - [ ] Calculate quality scores per dimension
+
+### Report Template
+
+````markdown
+# React Code Review Report
+
+## Meta Information
+- **Target**: {paths}
+- **Review Date**: {date}
+- **Reviewer Role**: Frontend Chief Architect
+
+## Summary
+- **Overall Status**: ✅ Pass / ⚠️ Needs Work / ❌ Fail
+- **Quality Score**: X/100
+- **One-line Assessment**: {concise quality summary}
+
+## Static Analysis Results
+
+| Tool | Status | Issues | Details |
+|------|--------|--------|---------|
+| ESLint | ✅/⚠️/❌ | {count} | {summary or "No issues found"} |
+| TypeScript | ✅/⚠️/❌ | {count} | {summary or "No issues found"} |
+
+## Dimension Analysis
+
+| Dimension | Score | Status | Key Findings |
+|-----------|-------|--------|--------------|
+| Component Atomicity & SRP | X/100 | ✅/⚠️/❌ | {summary} |
+| Hooks Compliance | X/100 | ✅/⚠️/❌ | {summary} |
+| State Management | X/100 | ✅/⚠️/❌ | {summary} |
+| Performance & Robustness | X/100 | ✅/⚠️/❌ | {summary} |
+
+## Constitution Alignment
+
+> [!NOTE]
+> If no constitution exists, state "No project constitution found - using general React best practices."
+
+| Principle | Status | Notes |
+|-----------|--------|-------|
+| {principle name} | ✅/⚠️/❌ | {alignment assessment} |
+
+## Detailed Findings
+
+### Critical Issues (CRITICAL)
+*Must fix before merge - Constitution violations, logic bugs, memory leaks, security vulnerabilities*
+
+- [ ] **[REACT-001]**: `{filename}:{line_number}` - {issue description}
+  - **Impact**: {why this matters}
+  - **Suggestion**:
+    ```tsx
+    {refactored code snippet}
+    ```
+
+### Warnings (HIGH)
+*Should fix - Hooks violations, tool errors, performance issues*
+
+- [ ] **[REACT-002]**: `{filename}:{line_number}` - {issue description}
+  - **Impact**: {potential risk}
+  - **Suggestion**:
+    ```tsx
+    {refactored code snippet}
+    ```
+
+### Warnings (MEDIUM)
+*Consider fixing - Design improvements, refactoring opportunities*
+
+- [ ] **[REACT-003]**: `{filename}:{line_number}` - {issue description}
+  - **Suggestion**: {improvement recommendation}
+
+### Suggestions (LOW)
+*Nice to have - Readability, style enhancements*
+
+- [ ] **[REACT-004]**: `{filename}:{line_number}` - {enhancement description}
+  - **Benefit**: {value of this change}
+
+## Strengths
+- {highlight 1-2 positive findings in the codebase}
+
+## Recommendations
+
+### Priority 1: Must Fix (Before Merge)
+1. {most critical action}
+2. {second most critical}
+
+### Priority 2: Should Fix (This Sprint)
+1. {important improvement}
+2. {another improvement}
+
+### Priority 3: Nice to Have (Future)
+1. {optional enhancement}
+
+## Scoring Breakdown
+
+| Category | Weight | Score | Weighted |
+|----------|--------|-------|----------|
+| Component Atomicity & SRP | 25% | X/100 | X |
+| Hooks Compliance | 25% | X/100 | X |
+| State Management | 25% | X/100 | X |
+| Performance & Robustness | 20% | X/100 | X |
+| Constitution Alignment | 5% | X/100 | X |
+| **Total** | **100%** | | **X/100** |
+
+## Available Follow-up Commands
+
+Based on the review result, consider:
+
+### If Issues Found
+- **Direct Fix**: Describe the changes you want (e.g., "Fix REACT-001 and REACT-002") and I will apply the fixes
+- **Re-run Review**: `/codexspec:review-react-code {paths}` - verify fixes after changes
+- **Proceed Anyway**: If issues are acceptable for current iteration
+
+### Next Steps Based on Review Result
+- **Pass**: Code is ready for commit/merge
+- **Needs Work**: Fix HIGH/CRITICAL issues, then re-run review
+- **Fail**: Significant rework required - consider `/codexspec:clarify` for design discussion
+````
+
+### Quality Criteria
+
+Before completing the review, verify:
+
+- [ ] Static analysis tools (ESLint, TypeScript) have been executed (if config exists)
+- [ ] All four review dimensions have been assessed
+- [ ] Constitution alignment has been checked (if constitution exists)
+- [ ] Issues are categorized by severity (CRITICAL/HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW)
+- [ ] Each CRITICAL/HIGH issue has specific code refactoring suggestions
+- [ ] Score reflects actual code quality accurately
+- [ ] Strengths section highlights positive aspects
+- [ ] Recommendations are prioritized and actionable
+
+### Output
+
+Display the review report in the conversation. Optionally save to `.codexspec/reviews/react-code-review-{timestamp}.md` if requested.

{codexspec-0.5.2 → codexspec-0.5.4}/templates/translations/de.json

@@ -30,6 +30,7 @@
             "category_core": "Kernbefehle ({count})",
             "category_enhanced": "Erweiterte Befehle ({count})",
             "category_git": "Git-Workflow ({count})",
+            "category_review": "Code-Überprüfung ({count})",
             "success_title": "Erfolg",
             "success_message": "CodexSpec-Projekt erfolgreich initialisiert!",
             "success_project_dir": "Projektverzeichnis: {path}",
@@ -58,6 +59,7 @@
             "category_core": "Kernbefehle ({count})",
             "category_enhanced": "Erweiterte Befehle ({count})",
             "category_git": "Git-Workflow ({count})",
+            "category_review": "Code-Überprüfung ({count})",
             "no_project": "Kein CodexSpec-Projekt im aktuellen Verzeichnis gefunden.",
             "run_init": "Führen Sie codexspec init aus, um ein neues Projekt zu erstellen.",
             "usage_hint": "Verwenden Sie /codexspec:<befehl>, um diese Befehle aufzurufen"
@@ -136,5 +138,13 @@
     "translate-docs": {
         "description": "Projektdokumentation in die angegebene Sprache übersetzen",
         "argument-hint": "--lang <sprachcodes> (z.B. 'zh,ja,ko') oder 'all' für alle Sprachen"
+    },
+    "review-python-code": {
+        "description": "Python-Code auf PEP 8-Konformität, Typsicherheit, Engineering-Robustheit und Verfassungsübereinstimmung überprüfen",
+        "argument-hint": "Pfad zur Python-Datei oder zum Verzeichnis zur Überprüfung\n\nBeispiele:\n- `src/codexspec/` - Gesamtes Paket überprüfen\n- `src/codexspec/__init__.py` - Einzelne Datei überprüfen\n- `src/ tests/` - Mehrere Pfade überprüfen"
+    },
+    "review-react-code": {
+        "description": "React/TypeScript-Code auf Komponentenarchitektur, Hooks-Compliance, Zustandsverwaltung, Performance und Verfassungsübereinstimmung überprüfen",
+        "argument-hint": "Pfad zur React/TypeScript-Datei oder zum Verzeichnis zur Überprüfung\n\nBeispiele:\n- `src/components/` - Gesamtes Komponentenverzeichnis überprüfen\n- `src/components/Button.tsx` - Einzelne Datei überprüfen\n- `src/hooks/ src/components/` - Mehrere Pfade überprüfen"
     }
 }

{codexspec-0.5.2 → codexspec-0.5.4}/templates/translations/en.json

@@ -30,6 +30,7 @@
       "category_core": "Core Commands ({count})",
       "category_enhanced": "Enhanced Commands ({count})",
       "category_git": "Git Workflow ({count})",
+      "category_review": "Code Review ({count})",
       "success_title": "Success",
       "success_message": "CodexSpec project initialized successfully!",
       "success_project_dir": "Project directory: {path}",
@@ -58,6 +59,7 @@
       "category_core": "Core Commands ({count})",
       "category_enhanced": "Enhanced Commands ({count})",
       "category_git": "Git Workflow ({count})",
+      "category_review": "Code Review ({count})",
       "no_project": "No CodexSpec project found in current directory.",
       "run_init": "Run codexspec init to create a new project.",
       "usage_hint": "Use /codexspec:<command> to invoke these commands"
@@ -136,5 +138,13 @@
   "translate-docs": {
     "description": "Translate project documentation to specified language",
     "argument-hint": "--lang <language_codes> (e.g. 'zh,ja,ko') or 'all' for all languages"
+  },
+  "review-python-code": {
+    "description": "Review Python code for PEP 8 compliance, type safety, engineering robustness, and constitution alignment",
+    "argument-hint": "Path to Python file or directory to review\n\nExamples:\n- `src/codexspec/` - Review entire package\n- `src/codexspec/__init__.py` - Review single file\n- `src/ tests/` - Review multiple paths"
+  },
+  "review-react-code": {
+    "description": "Review React/TypeScript code for component architecture, hooks compliance, state management, performance, and constitution alignment",
+    "argument-hint": "Path to React/TypeScript file or directory to review\n\nExamples:\n- `src/components/` - Review entire components directory\n- `src/components/Button.tsx` - Review single file\n- `src/hooks/ src/components/` - Review multiple paths"
   }
 }

{codexspec-0.5.2 → codexspec-0.5.4}/templates/translations/es.json

@@ -30,6 +30,7 @@
       "category_core": "Comandos principales ({count})",
       "category_enhanced": "Comandos mejorados ({count})",
       "category_git": "Flujo de trabajo Git ({count})",
+      "category_review": "Revisión de código ({count})",
       "success_title": "Éxito",
       "success_message": "¡Proyecto CodexSpec inicializado exitosamente!",
       "success_project_dir": "Directorio del proyecto: {path}",
@@ -58,6 +59,7 @@
       "category_core": "Comandos principales ({count})",
       "category_enhanced": "Comandos mejorados ({count})",
       "category_git": "Flujo de trabajo Git ({count})",
+      "category_review": "Revisión de código ({count})",
       "no_project": "No se encontró un proyecto CodexSpec en el directorio actual.",
       "run_init": "Ejecute codexspec init para crear un nuevo proyecto.",
       "usage_hint": "Use /codexspec:<comando> para invocar estos comandos"
@@ -136,5 +138,13 @@
   "translate-docs": {
     "description": "Traducir documentación del proyecto al idioma especificado",
     "argument-hint": "--lang <códigos_idioma> (ej: 'zh,ja,ko') o 'all' para todos los idiomas"
+  },
+  "review-python-code": {
+    "description": "Revisar código Python por conformidad PEP 8, seguridad de tipos, robustez de ingeniería y alineación con la constitución",
+    "argument-hint": "Ruta al archivo o directorio Python a revisar\n\nEjemplos:\n- `src/codexspec/` - Revisar paquete completo\n- `src/codexspec/__init__.py` - Revisar archivo único\n- `src/ tests/` - Revisar múltiples rutas"
+  },
+  "review-react-code": {
+    "description": "Revisar código React/TypeScript por arquitectura de componentes, cumplimiento de Hooks, gestión de estado, rendimiento y alineación con la constitución",
+    "argument-hint": "Ruta al archivo o directorio React/TypeScript a revisar\n\nEjemplos:\n- `src/components/` - Revisar directorio completo de componentes\n- `src/components/Button.tsx` - Revisar archivo único\n- `src/hooks/ src/components/` - Revisar múltiples rutas"
   }
 }

{codexspec-0.5.2 → codexspec-0.5.4}/templates/translations/fr.json

@@ -30,6 +30,7 @@
       "category_core": "Commandes principales ({count})",
       "category_enhanced": "Commandes avancées ({count})",
       "category_git": "Flux de travail Git ({count})",
+      "category_review": "Revue de code ({count})",
       "success_title": "Succès",
       "success_message": "Projet CodexSpec initialisé avec succès !",
       "success_project_dir": "Répertoire du projet: {path}",
@@ -58,6 +59,7 @@
       "category_core": "Commandes principales ({count})",
       "category_enhanced": "Commandes avancées ({count})",
       "category_git": "Flux de travail Git ({count})",
+      "category_review": "Revue de code ({count})",
       "no_project": "Aucun projet CodexSpec trouvé dans le répertoire actuel.",
       "run_init": "Exécutez codexspec init pour créer un nouveau projet.",
       "usage_hint": "Utilisez /codexspec:<commande> pour invoquer ces commandes"
@@ -136,5 +138,13 @@
   "translate-docs": {
     "description": "Traduire la documentation du projet dans la langue spécifiée",
     "argument-hint": "--lang <codes_langue> (ex: 'zh,ja,ko') ou 'all' pour toutes les langues"
+  },
+  "review-python-code": {
+    "description": "Réviser le code Python pour la conformité PEP 8, la sécurité des types, la robustesse d'ingénierie et l'alignement avec la constitution",
+    "argument-hint": "Chemin vers le fichier ou répertoire Python à réviser\n\nExemples:\n- `src/codexspec/` - Réviser le paquet complet\n- `src/codexspec/__init__.py` - Réviser un seul fichier\n- `src/ tests/` - Réviser plusieurs chemins"
+  },
+  "review-react-code": {
+    "description": "Réviser le code React/TypeScript pour l'architecture des composants, la conformité Hooks, la gestion d'état, la performance et l'alignement avec la constitution",
+    "argument-hint": "Chemin vers le fichier ou répertoire React/TypeScript à réviser\n\nExemples:\n- `src/components/` - Réviser le répertoire entier des composants\n- `src/components/Button.tsx` - Réviser un seul fichier\n- `src/hooks/ src/components/` - Réviser plusieurs chemins"
   }
 }

{codexspec-0.5.2 → codexspec-0.5.4}/templates/translations/ja.json

@@ -30,6 +30,7 @@
       "category_core": "コアコマンド ({count})",
       "category_enhanced": "拡張コマンド ({count})",
       "category_git": "Git ワークフロー ({count})",
+      "category_review": "コードレビュー ({count})",
       "success_title": "成功",
       "success_message": "CodexSpec プロジェクトが正常に初期化されました！",
       "success_project_dir": "プロジェクトディレクトリ: {path}",
@@ -58,6 +59,7 @@
       "category_core": "コアコマンド ({count})",
       "category_enhanced": "拡張コマンド ({count})",
       "category_git": "Git ワークフロー ({count})",
+      "category_review": "コードレビュー ({count})",
       "no_project": "現在のディレクトリにCodexSpecプロジェクトが見つかりません。",
       "run_init": "codexspec init を実行して新しいプロジェクトを作成してください。",
       "usage_hint": "/codexspec:<コマンド> を使用してこれらのコマンドを呼び出します"
@@ -136,5 +138,13 @@
   "translate-docs": {
     "description": "プロジェクトドキュメントを指定言語に翻訳",
     "argument-hint": "--lang <言語コード> (例: 'zh,ja,ko') または 'all' ですべての言語"
+  },
+  "review-python-code": {
+    "description": "PythonコードのPEP 8準拠、型安全性、エンジニアリングの堅牢性、憲法整合性をレビュー",
+    "argument-hint": "レビューするPythonファイルまたはディレクトリへのパス\n\n例：\n- `src/codexspec/` - パッケージ全体をレビュー\n- `src/codexspec/__init__.py` - 単一ファイルをレビュー\n- `src/ tests/` - 複数パスをレビュー"
+  },
+  "review-react-code": {
+    "description": "React/TypeScript コードをコンポーネントアーキテクチャ、Hooks 準拠、状態管理、パフォーマンス、憲法整合性についてレビュー",
+    "argument-hint": "レビューする React/TypeScript ファイルまたはディレクトリへのパス\n\n例:\n- `src/components/` - コンポーネントディレクトリ全体をレビュー\n- `src/components/Button.tsx` - 単一ファイルをレビュー\n- `src/hooks/ src/components/` - 複数パスをレビュー"
   }
 }

{codexspec-0.5.2 → codexspec-0.5.4}/templates/translations/ko.json

@@ -30,6 +30,7 @@
       "category_core": "핵심 명령 ({count})",
       "category_enhanced": "확장 명령 ({count})",
       "category_git": "Git 워크플로우 ({count})",
+      "category_review": "코드 리뷰 ({count})",
       "success_title": "성공",
       "success_message": "CodexSpec 프로젝트가 성공적으로 초기화되었습니다!",
       "success_project_dir": "프로젝트 디렉토리: {path}",
@@ -58,6 +59,7 @@
       "category_core": "핵심 명령 ({count})",
       "category_enhanced": "확장 명령 ({count})",
       "category_git": "Git 워크플로우 ({count})",
+      "category_review": "코드 리뷰 ({count})",
       "no_project": "현재 디렉토리에서 CodexSpec 프로젝트를 찾을 수 없습니다.",
       "run_init": "codexspec init을 실행하여 새 프로젝트를 생성하세요.",
       "usage_hint": "/codexspec:<명령>을 사용하여 이 명령들을 호출하세요"
@@ -136,5 +138,13 @@
   "translate-docs": {
     "description": "프로젝트 문서를 지정된 언어로 번역",
     "argument-hint": "--lang <언어_코드> (예: 'zh,ja,ko') 또는 'all'로 모든 언어"
+  },
+  "review-python-code": {
+    "description": "Python 코드의 PEP 8 준수, 타입 안전성, 엔지니어링 견고성 및 헌법 정렬 검토",
+    "argument-hint": "검토할 Python 파일 또는 디렉토리 경로\n\n예시:\n- `src/codexspec/` - 전체 패키지 검토\n- `src/codexspec/__init__.py` - 단일 파일 검토\n- `src/ tests/` - 여러 경로 검토"
+  },
+  "review-react-code": {
+    "description": "React/TypeScript 코드의 컴포넌트 아키텍처, Hooks 준수, 상태 관리, 성능 및 헌법 정렬 검토",
+    "argument-hint": "검토할 React/TypeScript 파일 또는 디렉토리 경로\n\n예시:\n- `src/components/` - 전체 컴포넌트 디렉토리 검토\n- `src/components/Button.tsx` - 단일 파일 검토\n- `src/hooks/ src/components/` - 여러 경로 검토"
   }
 }

{codexspec-0.5.2 → codexspec-0.5.4}/templates/translations/pt-BR.json

@@ -30,6 +30,7 @@
       "category_core": "Comandos principais ({count})",
       "category_enhanced": "Comandos avançados ({count})",
       "category_git": "Fluxo de trabalho Git ({count})",
+      "category_review": "Revisão de código ({count})",
       "success_title": "Sucesso",
       "success_message": "Projeto CodexSpec inicializado com sucesso!",
       "success_project_dir": "Diretório do projeto: {path}",
@@ -58,6 +59,7 @@
       "category_core": "Comandos principais ({count})",
       "category_enhanced": "Comandos avançados ({count})",
       "category_git": "Fluxo de trabalho Git ({count})",
+      "category_review": "Revisão de código ({count})",
       "no_project": "Nenhum projeto CodexSpec encontrado no diretório atual.",
       "run_init": "Execute codexspec init para criar um novo projeto.",
       "usage_hint": "Use /codexspec:<comando> para invocar estes comandos"
@@ -136,5 +138,13 @@
   "translate-docs": {
     "description": "Traduzir documentação do projeto para o idioma especificado",
     "argument-hint": "--lang <códigos_idioma> (ex: 'zh,ja,ko') ou 'all' para todos os idiomas"
+  },
+  "review-python-code": {
+    "description": "Revisar código Python por conformidade PEP 8, segurança de tipos, robustez de engenharia e alinhamento com a constituição",
+    "argument-hint": "Caminho para arquivo ou diretório Python a revisar\n\nExemplos:\n- `src/codexspec/` - Revisar pacote completo\n- `src/codexspec/__init__.py` - Revisar arquivo único\n- `src/ tests/` - Revisar múltiplos caminhos"
+  },
+  "review-react-code": {
+    "description": "Revisar código React/TypeScript por arquitetura de componentes, conformidade com Hooks, gerenciamento de estado, performance e alinhamento com a constituição",
+    "argument-hint": "Caminho para arquivo ou diretório React/TypeScript a revisar\n\nExemplos:\n- `src/components/` - Revisar diretório inteiro de componentes\n- `src/components/Button.tsx` - Revisar arquivo único\n- `src/hooks/ src/components/` - Revisar múltiplos caminhos"
   }
 }

{codexspec-0.5.2 → codexspec-0.5.4}/templates/translations/zh-CN.json

@@ -30,6 +30,7 @@
       "category_core": "核心命令 ({count})",
       "category_enhanced": "增强命令 ({count})",
       "category_git": "Git 工作流 ({count})",
+      "category_review": "代码审查 ({count})",
       "success_title": "成功",
       "success_message": "CodexSpec 项目初始化成功！",
       "success_project_dir": "项目目录: {path}",
@@ -58,6 +59,7 @@
       "category_core": "核心命令 ({count})",
       "category_enhanced": "增强命令 ({count})",
       "category_git": "Git 工作流 ({count})",
+      "category_review": "代码审查 ({count})",
       "no_project": "当前目录未找到 CodexSpec 项目。",
       "run_init": "运行 codexspec init 创建新项目。",
       "usage_hint": "使用 /codexspec:<命令> 来调用这些命令"
@@ -136,5 +138,13 @@
   "translate-docs": {
     "description": "翻译项目文档到指定语言",
     "argument-hint": "--lang <语言代码> (如 'zh,ja,ko') 或 'all' 翻译所有语言"
+  },
+  "review-python-code": {
+    "description": "审查 Python 代码的 PEP 8 合规性、类型安全、工程健壮性和宪法一致性",
+    "argument-hint": "要审查的 Python 文件或目录路径\n\n示例：\n- `src/codexspec/` - 审查整个包\n- `src/codexspec/__init__.py` - 审查单个文件\n- `src/ tests/` - 审查多个路径"
+  },
+  "review-react-code": {
+    "description": "审查 React/TypeScript 代码的组件架构、Hooks 规范、状态管理、性能表现和宪法一致性",
+    "argument-hint": "要审查的 React/TypeScript 文件或目录路径\n\n示例：\n- `src/components/` - 审查整个组件目录\n- `src/components/Button.tsx` - 审查单个文件\n- `src/hooks/ src/components/` - 审查多个路径"
   }
 }