feat(skills): add review-pr skill for dual-agent PR review

Spawns Hoshe (code quality) and Tyre (architecture) in parallel to review branch diffs against main. Includes Gitea tea CLI integration, vendor/generated file exclusion patterns, and practical tips learned from first review run on server and client boilerplate PRs. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-02-11 17:37:24 +01:00
parent 1f42ef471a
commit dead4361a5
1 changed files with 153 additions and 0 deletions
@@ -0,0 +1,153 @@
+---
+name: review-pr
+description: >
+  Review a branch diff with dual agents before merge. Use when the user says
+  "review-pr", "review this PR", "review this branch", or invokes /review-pr.
+  Spawns Hoshe (code quality) and Tyre (architecture) in parallel to review
+  the diff against main. Reports approve/reject with inline comments.
+user-invocable: true
+allowed-tools: Bash, Read, Grep, Glob, Task
+---
+
+# PR Review Skill
+
+Dual-agent review of a branch diff against main. Hoshe reviews code quality,
+Tyre reviews architecture. Both must approve for a clean review.
+
+## Workflow
+
+### 1. Determine the branch
+
+If the user provided a branch name as argument, use it. Otherwise use the
+current branch (`git branch --show-current`). If on `main`, ask the user
+which branch to review.
+
+To list open PRs on Gitea:
+```bash
+tea pr list --login schweitz --repo jpmschweitzer/settled-reach --state open --output simple
+```
+
+Fetch remote branches first:
+```bash
+git fetch --all
+```
+
+### 2. Generate the diff
+
+```bash
+git log --oneline main..<branch>
+git diff main...<branch> --stat
+```
+
+If the diff is empty, report "No changes to review" and stop.
+
+**Exclude generated/vendor files from the review diff.** Common exclusions:
+- `Cargo.lock` (auto-generated)
+- `client/addons/gdUnit4/` (vendor test framework)
+- `*.uid` (Godot-generated)
+- `db/commonwealth.db` (binary)
+
+Three-dot diff with pathspec exclusions is unreliable. Instead, either:
+1. Use `git diff main...<branch>` (full diff) and filter in the prompt, or
+2. Have Tyre read source files directly from the branch:
+   `git show origin/<branch>:<path>`
+
+For large diffs (>1000 lines of source), provide **source files** rather than
+raw diff to reviewers — cleaner context, better reviews. Read files with
+`git show origin/<branch>:<path>` and include them in the prompt.
+
+### 3. Spawn both reviewers in parallel
+
+Use the Task tool to spawn **two agents simultaneously** in a single message.
+Use `model: sonnet` for both — sufficient for review, saves cost.
+
+**Agent 1 — Hoshe (Code Quality)**
+- `subagent_type`: `hoshe`
+- `model`: `sonnet`
+- Prompt: Include source code and commit log. Ask Hoshe to review for:
+  - Correctness and bug risks
+  - Error handling gaps
+  - Test coverage (are new features tested?)
+  - Code style and clarity
+  - Security concerns (OWASP top 10, injection risks)
+  - Performance issues
+- Request structured verdict: APPROVE or REQUEST_CHANGES with file-specific comments
+
+**Agent 2 — Tyre (Architecture)**
+- `subagent_type`: `tyre`
+- `model`: `sonnet`
+- Prompt: Include source code and commit log. Tell Tyre to read the relevant
+  `decisions/*.md` files first, then review for:
+  - Architectural consistency with project decisions
+  - API/interface design quality
+  - Dependency and coupling concerns
+  - Scalability implications
+  - Whether the change respects non-negotiable baselines (D-010, D-012)
+- Tyre can read files directly from the branch using `git show origin/<branch>:<path>`
+- Request structured verdict: APPROVE or REQUEST_CHANGES with file-specific comments
+
+### 4. Present results
+
+Format the combined review as a table per reviewer:
+
+```
+## Review: <branch> -> main
+
+### Hoshe (Code Quality): [APPROVE | REQUEST_CHANGES]
+[Summary]
+| # | File | Severity | Issue |
+|---|------|----------|-------|
+| 1 | path:line | critical/warning/suggestion | description |
+
+### Tyre (Architecture): [APPROVE | REQUEST_CHANGES]
+[Summary]
+| # | File | Severity | Issue |
+|---|------|----------|-------|
+| 1 | path:line | critical/warning/suggestion | description |
+
+### Verdict: [APPROVED | CHANGES REQUESTED]
+```
+
+The overall verdict is APPROVED only if **both** reviewers approve.
+
+## Prompt template for reviewers
+
+Use this structure when constructing the agent prompts (adapt as needed):
+
+```
+Review the following branch diff for merge into main.
+
+Branch: {branch}
+Commits:
+{commit_log}
+
+Diff stats:
+{diff_stat}
+
+[Source files or diff here — exclude vendor/generated code]
+
+Review focus: {focus_area}
+
+Respond with:
+1. Verdict: APPROVE or REQUEST_CHANGES
+2. Summary: 2-3 sentence overall assessment
+3. Comments: List of specific issues, each with:
+   - File path and approximate location
+   - Severity: critical / warning / suggestion
+   - Description of the issue
+If no issues found, say APPROVE with a brief positive summary.
+```
+
+## Tips from practice
+
+- **Vendor code**: Explicitly note vendor code in the prompt so reviewers focus
+  on project code. Mention it as a separate architectural concern (should it be
+  gitignored? submoduled?).
+- **Large PRs**: For PRs touching many files, provide file-by-file source code
+  rather than a single massive diff. Reviewers give better feedback.
+- **Multiple PRs**: When reviewing several PRs, spawn all reviewers in one
+  parallel batch (4 agents for 2 PRs). This is faster than sequential.
+- **Tyre reads decisions**: Always tell Tyre to read the relevant `decisions/*.md`
+  files — this grounds the review in project-specific architectural choices.
+- **Binary/DB files**: Exclude binary files from the diff. Note them in the
+  prompt as "also changed" if relevant.