Agentic Code Review

Deep, multi-agent code review for personal repos. Analyzes changes, prioritizes files, spawns specialized review agents in parallel, and synthesizes actionable findings.

When to Use

• After writing significant code, before committing
• Before pushing a branch
• Reviewing specific commits
• Comparing branches (e.g., feature vs main)

Usage

# Review all local changes (staged + unstaged)
skill agentic-review

# Review only staged changes
skill agentic-review --staged

# Review specific commit(s)
skill agentic-review abc123
skill agentic-review abc123..def456

# Review branch diff against main
skill agentic-review --branch feature-branch
skill agentic-review --branch HEAD  # current branch vs main

How It Works

Phase 1: Detect & Gather Changes

First, determine what to review based on arguments:

# Check if we're in a git repo
git rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree 2>/dev/null || echo "NOT_GIT_REPO"

# Get current branch
git branch --show-current

# Check for changes
git status --porcelain        # Any local changes?
git diff --stat               # Unstaged changes stats
git diff --cached --stat      # Staged changes stats

Determine review scope from $ARGUMENTS:

Phase 2: Pre-Scan & Prioritize Files

Analyze changed files to recommend review order:

# Get changed files with stats
git diff --numstat HEAD~1 2>/dev/null || git diff --numstat

# For each file, assess:
# - Lines changed (more = higher priority)
# - File type (src > test > config > docs)
# - Risk areas (auth, security, data, API)

Prioritization Heuristics:

1. HIGH: Security-related files (auth, crypto, permissions, secrets)
2. HIGH: Core business logic (models, services, controllers)
3. MEDIUM: API endpoints, data access
4. MEDIUM: Configuration files that affect runtime
5. LOW: Tests, documentation, styling

Output file review order before proceeding.

Phase 3: Language Detection & Agent Selection

Detect languages from file extensions:

# Get unique file extensions from changes
git diff --name-only | sed 's/.*\.//' | sort -u

Agent Selection Matrix:

Always include:

• security-sentinel: Security vulnerabilities, secrets, OWASP
• performance-oracle: Performance issues, N+1, memory
• pattern-recognition-specialist: Anti-patterns, duplication
• code-simplicity-reviewer: Over-engineering, unnecessary complexity

Phase 4: Parallel Agent Analysis

CRITICAL: Launch agents in parallel using Task tool

Spawn 4-6 agents simultaneously, each with:

1. The full diff (or relevant portions for large changes)
2. Context about file purposes
3. Instruction to return structured findings

Task security-sentinel("Review this diff for security issues: [diff]")
Task performance-oracle("Review for performance problems: [diff]")
Task pattern-recognition-specialist("Check for anti-patterns: [diff]")
Task code-simplicity-reviewer("Check for over-engineering: [diff]")
Task [language-specific]("Review for [language] best practices: [diff]")

Each agent returns findings in this format:

## Findings

### [SEVERITY] Issue Title
- **File**: path/to/file.ts:42
- **Issue**: Description of the problem
- **Impact**: Why this matters
- **Fix**: Suggested remediation

Phase 5: Synthesize & Prioritize

Combine all agent findings and deduplicate:

Priority Levels:

• P1 - CRITICAL (blocks commit): Security vulnerabilities, data corruption risks, obvious bugs
• P2 - IMPORTANT (should fix): Performance issues, architectural concerns, significant code smells
• P3 - SUGGESTED (nice to have): Minor improvements, style issues, refactoring opportunities

Deduplication Rules:

• Same file + same line = keep most severe
• Overlapping concerns = merge into single finding
• Subjective "might be" issues = demote to P3 or drop

Phase 6: Present Findings

Output structured summary:

══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
AGENTIC CODE REVIEW
══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

📊 SUMMARY
────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Files reviewed: 8
Total findings: 12
  🔴 P1 Critical: 2 (MUST FIX)
  🟡 P2 Important: 5
  🔵 P3 Suggested: 5

Agents used: security-sentinel, kieran-typescript-reviewer,
             performance-oracle, pattern-recognition-specialist

📁 FILES BY PRIORITY
────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
1. src/auth/login.ts        [🔴 P1] Security issue
2. src/api/users.ts         [🟡 P2] Performance concern
3. src/utils/helpers.ts     [🔵 P3] Code smell
...

🔴 P1 - CRITICAL (Must fix before commit)
────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
1. SQL Injection Risk
   📍 src/api/users.ts:47
   ⚠️  Raw SQL with string interpolation
   💡 Use parameterized query instead

2. Hardcoded Secret
   📍 src/config/auth.ts:12
   ⚠️  API key directly in source
   💡 Move to environment variable

🟡 P2 - IMPORTANT (Should fix)
────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
[Similar format...]

🔵 P3 - SUGGESTED (Nice to have)
────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
[Similar format...]

══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

Phase 7: Offer to Fix

After presenting findings, offer options:

NEXT STEPS
────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
1. Fix all P1 issues automatically
2. Fix all P1 + P2 issues automatically
3. Fix specific issue by number
4. Show detailed analysis for an issue
5. Exit (I'll fix manually)

Choice [1-5]:

If user chooses to fix:

1. Work through issues one at a time
2. Show the fix being applied
3. Ask for confirmation before moving to next
4. Re-run review on fixed files to verify

Configuration

Default Agents (always run):

• security-sentinel
• performance-oracle
• pattern-recognition-specialist
• code-simplicity-reviewer

Language-Specific Agents (auto-detected):

• TypeScript/JS: kieran-typescript-reviewer
• Python: kieran-python-reviewer
• Ruby: kieran-rails-reviewer, dhh-rails-reviewer

Optional Agents (if relevant files detected):

• architecture-strategist (for structural changes)
• data-integrity-guardian (for DB/migration changes)

Examples

Example 1: Quick pre-commit review

> skill agentic-review --staged

Analyzing staged changes...
Files: 3 changed (src/api/users.ts, src/models/User.ts, tests/users.test.ts)
Lines: +45, -12

Spawning review agents in parallel...
✓ security-sentinel
✓ kieran-typescript-reviewer
✓ performance-oracle
✓ pattern-recognition-specialist

Results:
🔴 P1: 0
🟡 P2: 1 (missing input validation)
🔵 P3: 2 (minor suggestions)

Ready to commit! One P2 to consider:
→ src/api/users.ts:34 - Add validation for email parameter

Fix now? [y/N]

Example 2: Branch review before PR

> skill agentic-review --branch feature/auth-refactor

Comparing feature/auth-refactor to main...
Files: 12 changed
Lines: +342, -156

[Full analysis with all agents...]

Review complete. See findings above.
Would you like to fix any issues before creating PR?

Important Notes

• This skill is for personal repos - no GitHub/PR integration required