---

name: code-review description: Review generated code for bugs, security issues, performance, and best practices. Use when reviewing Claude-generated code, checking for vulnerabilities, auditing implementation quality, or validating code changes before commit. model_tier: opus parallel_hints: can_parallel_with: [test-writer, lint-monorepo, constraint-preflight] must_serialize_with: [database-migration] preferred_batch_size: 5 context_hints: max_file_context: 50 compression_level: 1 requires_git_context: true requires_db_context: false escalation_triggers:

• pattern: "CRITICAL" reason: "Critical security issues require human approval before merge"
• keyword: ["authentication", "authorization", "crypto"] reason: "Security-sensitive code requires human review"
• pattern: "database.*schema" reason: "Schema changes require database-migration skill review"

---

Code Review Skill

A structured code review skill for analyzing generated implementations, focusing on quality, security, maintainability, and alignment with project standards.

When This Skill Activates

• Reviewing code generated by Claude Code or other AI agents
• Auditing for security vulnerabilities
• Checking code quality and best practices
• Validating against project standards
• Assessing performance implications
• Before committing significant changes

Review Methodology

Analysis Focus Areas

1. Code Quality

• Structure and readability
• Naming conventions (PascalCase classes, snake_case functions)
• Appropriate abstraction levels
• DRY principle adherence
• SOLID principles compliance

2. Security & Safety

• Input validation and sanitization
• Authentication/authorization checks
• Error handling coverage
• OWASP Top 10 vulnerability check
• No hardcoded secrets
• SQL injection prevention (SQLAlchemy ORM usage)
• Path traversal prevention

3. Performance

• Algorithm efficiency (O(n) analysis)
• Database query optimization (N+1 prevention)
• Memory usage patterns
• Caching opportunities
• Async/await for I/O operations

4. Maintainability

• Test coverage adequacy
• Type hints on all functions
• Google-style docstrings
• Exception handling
• Pydantic schema usage

5. Standards Compliance

• Project coding standards (CLAUDE.md)
• Framework conventions (FastAPI patterns)
• ACGME compliance (if touching scheduling)
• HIPAA/PERSEC considerations

Review Process

Step 1: Context Gathering

# Understand the change scope
git diff HEAD~1 --stat
git diff HEAD~1 --name-only

# Read the changed files
git diff HEAD~1 <file>

Step 2: Architecture Review

Check layered architecture compliance:

Route (thin) -> Controller -> Service -> Repository -> Model

Questions to ask:

• Does business logic stay in services?
• Are database operations async?
• Are Pydantic schemas used for validation?

Step 3: Static Analysis

cd /home/user/Autonomous-Assignment-Program-Manager/backend

# Linting
ruff check <file> --show-source

# Type checking
mypy <file> --python-version 3.11

# Security scan
bandit -r <file> -ll

Step 4: Pattern Matching

Check for common issues:

Pattern	Issue	Fix
== True	Explicit boolean	Use if var:
Missing await	Sync call in async	Add await
Bare except:	Catches all	Specific exceptions
Any type	Type escape	Proper typing
Unused variable	Dead code	Remove or use _

Step 5: Security Deep Dive

# Check for these patterns:

# BAD - SQL injection risk
query = f"SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = {user_id}"

# GOOD - Parameterized
query = select(User).where(User.id == user_id)

# BAD - Path traversal
file_path = base_dir + user_input

# GOOD - Validated path
file_path = validate_path(base_dir, user_input)

# BAD - Sensitive data in error
raise HTTPException(detail=f"User {email} not found")

# GOOD - Generic error
raise HTTPException(detail="User not found")

Output Format

Finding Categories

Use these severity levels:

Level	Icon	Meaning
CRITICAL	:red_circle:	Security vulnerability or major bug - must fix
WARNING	:yellow_circle:	Code quality issue with production impact
INFO	:blue_circle:	Best practices and optimization suggestions
GOOD	:white_check_mark:	Well-implemented patterns worth highlighting

Review Report Template

## Code Review Summary

**Files Reviewed:** [count]
**Overall Assessment:** [PASS / NEEDS CHANGES / BLOCK]

### Critical Issues (Must Fix)
1. [File:line] - Description
   - Impact: [what could go wrong]
   - Fix: [specific suggestion]

### Warnings (Should Fix)
1. [File:line] - Description
   - Suggestion: [how to improve]

### Recommendations (Nice to Have)
1. [File:line] - Description

### Good Patterns Observed
1. [File:line] - Description of well-implemented code

### Summary Checklist
- [ ] All type hints present
- [ ] Tests added for new code
- [ ] No security issues
- [ ] Follows layered architecture
- [ ] Async operations correct
- [ ] Error handling appropriate

Integration with Existing Skills

With automated-code-fixer

When critical or warning issues found:

1. Document the issue
2. Trigger automated-code-fixer skill
3. Re-run review after fix
4. Verify quality gates pass

With code-quality-monitor

Before final approval:

# Run full quality check
cd /home/user/Autonomous-Assignment-Program-Manager/backend
pytest --tb=no -q && ruff check app/ && mypy app/

With security-audit

For security-sensitive changes:

1. Defer to security-audit skill
2. Require additional review for auth/crypto code
3. Escalate HIPAA/PERSEC concerns

Escalation Rules

Escalate to human when:

1. Changes touch authentication or authorization
2. Database schema modifications detected
3. ACGME compliance logic affected
4. Cryptographic code modified
5. Third-party API credentials handling
6. Unclear business logic requirements
7. Multiple interdependent changes

Quick Review Commands

# Full review suite
cd /home/user/Autonomous-Assignment-Program-Manager/backend

# 1. Check syntax and imports
ruff check <file> --select F,I

# 2. Check security
bandit -r <file> -ll

# 3. Check types
mypy <file> --ignore-missing-imports

# 4. Check tests exist
pytest --collect-only tests/test_<module>.py

# 5. Run related tests
pytest tests/test_<module>.py -v

Common Review Patterns

Python Backend

# REVIEW: Ensure async/await pattern
async def get_item(db: AsyncSession, item_id: str) -> Optional[Item]:
    result = await db.execute(select(Item).where(Item.id == item_id))
    return result.scalar_one_or_none()

# REVIEW: Check Pydantic schema usage
@router.post("/items", response_model=ItemResponse)
async def create_item(
    item: ItemCreate,  # Pydantic input validation
    db: AsyncSession = Depends(get_db),
    current_user: User = Depends(get_current_user)
) -> ItemResponse:
    pass

TypeScript Frontend

// REVIEW: Check for proper typing
interface Props {
  scheduleId: string;  // Not 'any'
  onUpdate: (schedule: Schedule) => void;
}

// REVIEW: Error boundaries and loading states
const ScheduleView: React.FC<Props> = ({ scheduleId }) => {
  const { data, error, isLoading } = useQuery(['schedule', scheduleId]);

  if (isLoading) return <Skeleton />;
  if (error) return <ErrorBoundary error={error} />;
  return <Schedule data={data} />;
};

Examples

Example 1: N+1 Query Detection

Context: Reviewing PR that adds resident work hour summary endpoint

Input:

# backend/app/api/routes/residents.py
@router.get("/residents/work-hours")
async def get_resident_work_hours(db: AsyncSession = Depends(get_db)):
    residents = await db.execute(select(Person).where(Person.role == "RESIDENT"))

    result = []
    for resident in residents.scalars():
        # Query for each resident - N+1 problem!
        assignments = await db.execute(
            select(Assignment).where(Assignment.person_id == resident.id)
        )
        hours = sum(a.duration for a in assignments.scalars())
        result.append({"resident": resident.name, "hours": hours})

    return result

Process:

1. Identify pattern: Loop over residents, then query assignments for each
2. Count queries: 1 (residents) + N (assignments per resident) = N+1 queries
3. Check performance impact: With 30 residents, this executes 31 queries
4. Propose fix using selectinload()

Output:

## Code Review Finding

**Severity:** WARNING
**Category:** Performance
**File:** `backend/app/api/routes/residents.py:45`

**Issue:** N+1 Query Problem

This code queries the database once per resident (N+1 queries). With 30 residents,
this executes 31 queries instead of 1.

**Current Code:**
```python
residents = await db.execute(select(Person).where(Person.role == "RESIDENT"))
for resident in residents.scalars():
    assignments = await db.execute(  # Separate query per resident
        select(Assignment).where(Assignment.person_id == resident.id)
    )

Suggested Fix:

from sqlalchemy.orm import selectinload

residents = await db.execute(
    select(Person)
    .where(Person.role == "RESIDENT")
    .options(selectinload(Person.assignments))  # Load in single query
)

result = []
for resident in residents.scalars():
    hours = sum(a.duration for a in resident.assignments)  # No additional query
    result.append({"resident": resident.name, "hours": hours})

Impact: Reduces queries from 31 to 2, improving response time by ~80%

### Example 2: Missing Authentication Check

**Context:** Security review of new admin endpoint

**Input:**
```python
# backend/app/api/routes/admin.py
@router.delete("/users/{user_id}")
async def delete_user(
    user_id: str,
    db: AsyncSession = Depends(get_db)
):
    """Delete a user account."""
    await db.execute(delete(User).where(User.id == user_id))
    await db.commit()
    return {"status": "deleted"}

Process:

1. Check for authentication: Missing Depends(get_current_user)
2. Check for authorization: No role check (admin only)
3. Assess severity: CRITICAL - unauthenticated delete is a security vulnerability
4. Verify against project pattern: See backend/app/api/routes/auth.py for correct pattern

Output:

## Code Review Finding

**Severity:** :red_circle: CRITICAL
**Category:** Security
**File:** `backend/app/api/routes/admin.py:12`

**Issue:** Missing Authentication and Authorization

This endpoint allows ANYONE to delete user accounts without authentication.

**Security Impact:**
- **Broken Access Control** (OWASP A01:2021)
- Unauthenticated users can delete any account
- No audit trail of who performed deletion
- No role-based access control

**Current Code:**
```python
@router.delete("/users/{user_id}")
async def delete_user(user_id: str, db: AsyncSession = Depends(get_db)):

Required Fix:

from app.api.deps import get_current_user, require_roles
from app.models.user import User

@router.delete("/users/{user_id}")
async def delete_user(
    user_id: str,
    db: AsyncSession = Depends(get_db),
    current_user: User = Depends(require_roles(["admin"]))  # Admin only
):
    """Delete a user account (admin only)."""
    # Add audit log
    logger.info(f"Admin {current_user.id} deleting user {user_id}")

    await db.execute(delete(User).where(User.id == user_id))
    await db.commit()
    return {"status": "deleted"}

Action Required: BLOCK MERGE until fixed

### Example 3: Async/Await Missing

**Context:** Reviewing database operation in service layer

**Input:**
```python
# backend/app/services/assignment_service.py
async def create_assignment(
    db: AsyncSession,
    assignment_data: AssignmentCreate
) -> Assignment:
    """Create a new assignment."""
    assignment = Assignment(**assignment_data.dict())
    db.add(assignment)  # Missing await!
    db.commit()         # Missing await!
    return assignment

Process:

1. Identify async context: Function is async def
2. Check database operations: db.add() and db.commit() are async methods
3. Detect missing await: These will fail at runtime
4. Verify correct pattern: Check existing service implementations

Output:

## Code Review Finding

**Severity:** :red_circle: CRITICAL
**Category:** Code Quality
**File:** `backend/app/services/assignment_service.py:23`

**Issue:** Missing `await` on Async Database Operations

Database operations in async context must use `await`, otherwise they won't execute.

**Current Code (Will Fail):**
```python
db.add(assignment)  # Returns coroutine, doesn't execute
db.commit()         # Returns coroutine, doesn't execute

Required Fix:

async def create_assignment(
    db: AsyncSession,
    assignment_data: AssignmentCreate
) -> Assignment:
    """Create a new assignment."""
    assignment = Assignment(**assignment_data.dict())
    db.add(assignment)
    await db.commit()  # Add await
    await db.refresh(assignment)  # Refresh to get generated ID
    return assignment

Note: SQLAlchemy 2.0's add() is synchronous, but commit() and refresh() require await in async sessions.

Testing: Add test to verify assignment is actually persisted to database.

## Common Failure Modes

| Failure Mode | Symptom | Root Cause | Recovery Steps |
|--------------|---------|------------|----------------|
| **Linter Passes But Logic Broken** | Code has no syntax errors but doesn't work | Linter checks syntax, not semantics | 1. Run tests to catch logic errors<br>2. Add type checking with mypy<br>3. Review business logic manually |
| **Tests Pass Locally, Fail in CI** | Green tests on dev machine, red in CI | Environment differences (Python version, dependencies) | 1. Check CI Python version matches local<br>2. Verify `requirements.txt` is up to date<br>3. Run tests in Docker to match CI environment |
| **Type Hints Present But Incorrect** | `mypy` reports no errors but types are wrong | Using `Any` or overly broad types | 1. Enable stricter mypy settings<br>2. Review type hints for accuracy<br>3. Add `--disallow-any-explicit` flag |
| **Security Issue Missed by Bandit** | Vulnerability not flagged by scanner | Custom code pattern not in Bandit rules | 1. Manual security review required<br>2. Check OWASP Top 10 manually<br>3. Defer to security-audit skill |
| **Performance Issue Not Detected** | Code works but is slow | No performance testing in review | 1. Profile code with cProfile<br>2. Check for N+1 queries manually<br>3. Add performance tests to suite |
| **Breaking Change Not Caught** | Tests pass but API contract changed | No contract testing | 1. Check if Pydantic schema changed<br>2. Verify API versioning if needed<br>3. Add integration tests for API contract |

## Validation Checklist

After completing code review, verify:

- [ ] **Tests:** All tests pass (`pytest --tb=short -q`)
- [ ] **Linting:** No errors (`ruff check app/ tests/`)
- [ ] **Type Checking:** No errors (`mypy app/ --python-version 3.11`)
- [ ] **Security:** No vulnerabilities (`bandit -r app/ -ll`)
- [ ] **Coverage:** >= 70% (`pytest --cov=app --cov-fail-under=70`)
- [ ] **Architecture:** Follows layered pattern (Route → Controller → Service → Model)
- [ ] **Async/Await:** All database operations use `await`
- [ ] **Input Validation:** Pydantic schemas used for all inputs
- [ ] **Authentication:** Protected endpoints have `Depends(get_current_user)`
- [ ] **Authorization:** Role checks where appropriate
- [ ] **Error Handling:** No sensitive data in error messages
- [ ] **Documentation:** Docstrings on public functions
- [ ] **No Hardcoded Secrets:** Check for API keys, passwords
- [ ] **Database Migrations:** If models changed, migration exists
- [ ] **Manual Testing:** Complex logic tested manually if needed