Requesting Code Review

Dispatch superpowers:code-reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade.

Core principle: Review early, review often.

When to Request Review

Mandatory:

●After each task in subagent-driven development

●After completing major feature

●Before merge to main

Optional but valuable:

●When stuck (fresh perspective)

●Before refactoring (baseline check)

●After fixing complex bug

How to Request

1. Get git SHAs:

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

2. Dispatch code-reviewer subagent:

Use Task tool with superpowers:code-reviewer type, fill template at code-reviewer.md

Placeholders:

●{WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED} - What you just built

●{PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS} - What it should do

●{BASE_SHA} - Starting commit

●{HEAD_SHA} - Ending commit

●{DESCRIPTION} - Brief summary

3. Act on feedback:

●Fix Critical issues immediately

●Fix Important issues before proceeding

●Note Minor issues for later

●Push back if reviewer is wrong (with reasoning)

Example

[Just completed Task 2: Add verification function]

You: Let me request code review before proceeding.

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

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

[Subagent returns]:
  Strengths: Clean architecture, real tests
  Issues:
    Important: Missing progress indicators
    Minor: Magic number (100) for reporting interval
  Assessment: Ready to proceed

You: [Fix progress indicators]
[Continue to Task 3]

Integration with Workflows

Subagent-Driven Development:

●Review after EACH task

●Catch issues before they compound

●Fix before moving to next task

Executing Plans:

●Review after each batch (3 tasks)

●Get feedback, apply, continue

Ad-Hoc Development:

●Review before merge

●Review when stuck

Red Flags

Never:

●Skip review because "it's simple"

●Ignore Critical issues

●Proceed with unfixed Important issues

●Argue with valid technical feedback

If reviewer wrong:

●Push back with technical reasoning

●Show code/tests that prove it works

●Request clarification

See template at: requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md

requesting-code-review

Documentation