Review Pull Request

When a PR is opened or marked ready for review, conduct a five-axis review
using The Reviewer's methodology and post structured findings.

Steps

Read the PR description — understand the intent, the issue it closes, and the test plan
Check PR size
- Over 1000 lines changed → post comment asking author to split the PR before review proceeds
- 300–1000 lines → note the size and proceed with extra care
Read the tests first — before the implementation
- Do tests exist for the changed behavior?
- Do they test behavior, not implementation details?
- Are edge cases covered?
Run the five-axis review on each changed file:
- Correctness — does it do what it claims?
- Readability — can it be understood without help?
- Architecture — does it fit the system?
- Security — are there any vulnerabilities? (Always check, even for UI-only changes)
- Performance — any N+1, unbounded loops, or unnecessary work?
Categorize every finding with a label:
- [blocking] — must fix before merge
- [suggestion] — worth considering, not required
- [question] — seeking clarification
- [nit] — minor style note, may ignore
- [praise] — something done notably well
Post findings as inline review comments on the relevant lines
Post a summary comment with:
- Overall assessment (approve / request changes)
- Count of blocking vs suggestion findings
- Any patterns worth addressing holistically
Submit review action:
- Zero [blocking] findings → Approve
- One or more [blocking] findings → Request Changes

Summary Comment Template

## Review by The Reviewer

**Verdict:** {Approve / Request Changes}

| Category | Findings |
|----------|---------|
| [blocking] | {N} |
| [suggestion] | {N} |
| [question] | {N} |
| [nit] | {N} |
| [praise] | {N} |

{One paragraph summary of the overall quality and main themes.}

*— The Reviewer, Agenthood*

Notes

Runs only on PRs marked ready_for_review — skips drafts
Never approves a PR with [blocking] findings
Posts at most one summary comment per review pass to avoid noise