spec-requesting-code-review

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English

🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

请求代码审查

Request Code Review

派发 code-reviewer 子智能体，在问题蔓延前发现问题。

核心原则： 尽早审查、频繁审查。

开始时宣布：「我正在使用 spec-requesting-code-review 技能请求代码审查并派发审查子智能体。」

Dispatch the code-reviewer subagent to catch issues before they spread.

Core Principles: Review early, review often.

Announce at the start: "I am using the spec-requesting-code-review skill to request a code review and dispatch the review subagent."

何时请求审查

When to Request a Review

必须：

subagent-driven development 中每个任务之后
完成主要功能后
合并到 main 之前

可选但有价值：

卡住时（新视角）
重构前（基线检查）
修好复杂 bug 后

Mandatory:

After each task in subagent-driven development
After completing major features
Before merging to main

Optional but Valuable:

When stuck (for a fresh perspective)
Before refactoring (baseline check)
After fixing complex bugs

如何请求

How to Request a Review

1. 获取 git SHAs：

bash

BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1)  # 或 origin/main
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

2. 派发 code-reviewer 子智能体：

使用 Task 工具，类型为 code-reviewer，填写

code-reviewer.md

中的模板

占位符：

```
{WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED}
```
- 你刚实现的内容
```
{PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS}
```
- 应实现的内容
```
{BASE_SHA}
```
- 起始提交
```
{HEAD_SHA}
```
- 结束提交
```
{DESCRIPTION}
```
- 简要摘要

3. 按反馈行动：

立即修复 Critical 问题
继续前修复 Important 问题
将 Minor 问题记录待后处理
若审查者错误则反对（附理由）

1. Get git SHAs:

bash

BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1)  # or origin/main
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

2. Dispatch the code-reviewer subagent:

Use the Task tool, with type code-reviewer, and fill in the template from

code-reviewer.md

Placeholders:

```
{WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED}
```
- What you just implemented
```
{PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS}
```
- What should be implemented
```
{BASE_SHA}
```
- Starting commit
```
{HEAD_SHA}
```
- Ending commit
```
{DESCRIPTION}
```
- Brief summary

3. Act on Feedback:

Fix Critical issues immediately
Fix Important issues before proceeding
Record Minor issues for later handling
Object if the reviewer is wrong (with reasoning)

示例

Example

[刚完成 Task 2：添加验证函数]

你：先请求代码审查再继续。

BASE_SHA=$(git log --oneline | grep "Task 1" | head -1 | awk '{print $1}')
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

[派发 code-reviewer 子智能体]
  WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED: 会话索引的验证和修复函数
  PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: docs/plans/deployment-plan.md 的 Task 2
  BASE_SHA: a7981ec
  HEAD_SHA: 3df7661
  DESCRIPTION: 添加 verifyIndex() 和 repairIndex()，含 4 种问题类型

[子智能体返回]：
  优点：架构清晰、有真实测试
  问题：
    Important：缺少进度指示
    Minor：报告间隔的魔法数字 (100)
  评估：可以继续

你：[修复进度指示]
[继续 Task 3]

[Just completed Task 2: Add validation functions]

You: Request a code review before proceeding.

BASE_SHA=$(git log --oneline | grep "Task 1" | head -1 | awk '{print $1}')
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

[Dispatch code-reviewer subagent]
  WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED: Session index verification and repair functions
  PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from docs/plans/deployment-plan.md
  BASE_SHA: a7981ec
  HEAD_SHA: 3df7661
  DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex(), covering 4 issue types

[Subagent returns]:
  Pros: Clear architecture, has real tests
  Issues:
    Important: Missing progress indication
    Minor: Magic number (100) in report interval
  Assessment: Can proceed

You: [Fix progress indication]
[Proceed to Task 3]

与工作流集成

Integration with Workflows

Subagent-Driven Development：

每个任务后审查
在问题累积前发现
在进入下一任务前修复

Executing Plans：

每批（3 个任务）后审查
获取反馈、应用、继续

临时开发：

合并前审查
卡住时审查

Subagent-Driven Development:

Review after each task
Catch issues before they accumulate
Fix before moving to the next task

Executing Plans:

Review after every batch (3 tasks)
Get feedback, apply it, and continue

Ad Hoc Development:

Review before merging
Review when stuck

Red Flags

Never:

Skip review because it's "too simple"
Ignore Critical issues
Proceed with unresolved Important issues
Argue against valid technical feedback

If the reviewer is wrong:

Object with technical reasoning
Show code/tests that prove it works
Ask for clarification

Template located at: spec-requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md

红旗

—

绝不：

因「太简单」跳过审查
忽视 Critical 问题
带着未修复的 Important 问题继续
与有效技术反馈争论

若审查者错误：

用技术推理反对
展示证明其有效的代码/测试
请求澄清

模板见：spec-requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md

—