Claude Agent Skill · by Obra

Requesting Code Review

This dispatches a code reviewer subagent that gets clean context about your changes without your session history, keeping reviews focused on the actual work pro

Install
Terminal · npx
$npx skills add https://github.com/obra/superpowers --skill requesting-code-review
Works with Paperclip

How Requesting Code Review fits into a Paperclip company.

Requesting Code Review drops into any Paperclip agent that handles this kind of work. Assign it to a specialist inside a pre-configured PaperclipOrg company and the skill becomes available on every heartbeat — no prompt engineering, no tool wiring.

S
SaaS FactoryPaired

Pre-configured AI company — 18 agents, 18 skills, one-time purchase.

$27$59
Explore pack
Source file
SKILL.md105 lines
Expand
---name: requesting-code-reviewdescription: Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements--- # Requesting Code Review Dispatch superpowers:code-reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade. The reviewer gets precisely crafted context for evaluation — never your session's history. This keeps the reviewer focused on the work product, not your thought process, and preserves your own context for continued work. **Core principle:** Review early, review often. ## When to Request Review **Mandatory:**- After each task in subagent-driven development- After completing major feature- Before merge to main **Optional but valuable:**- When stuck (fresh perspective)- Before refactoring (baseline check)- After fixing complex bug ## How to Request **1. Get git SHAs:**```bashBASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1)  # or origin/mainHEAD_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/superpowers/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