Code Review Skill

Purpose

Perform comprehensive code reviews on files that have been modified in the current git working directory. Review code for:

• Security vulnerabilities (OWASP Top 10)
• Performance issues (algorithmic complexity, ORM N+1 queries)
• Logic bugs and unintended behavior
• Adherence to project coding standards
• Code quality and maintainability

When to Use

Invoke this skill when:

• User explicitly requests code review
• User asks to review changes before committing
• User wants feedback on modified files
• User mentions checking for bugs, security issues, or performance problems

Code Review Process

Step 1: Identify Changed Files

Use git plumbing commands to get a list of files that have been modified:

# Get all files with uncommitted changes (staged and unstaged)
git diff --name-only HEAD

# Alternative: Get only staged files
git diff --cached --name-only

# Alternative: Get files changed in recent commits
git diff --name-only HEAD~1..HEAD

Store the list of changed files for systematic review.

Step 2: Read Project Standards

Before reviewing code, load the project's coding standards to understand expectations:

• Python/Backend code: Read

  /Users/daviddworetzky/Documents/repos/Geist/docs/agents.md

  for agent architecture patterns and best practices
• General standards: Read

  /Users/daviddworetzky/Documents/repos/Geist/claude.md

  (or

  CLAUDE.md

  ) for SQLAlchemy patterns, dependency preferences, SDLC process, and general coding preferences

Key standards to check:

• SQLAlchemy models should follow the pattern in claude.md (proper imports, Base inheritance, relationships)
• Prefer minimal inline implementations over extra dependency imports
• Core libraries are better than PyPI packages
• Models must be added to

  scripts/copy_weights.py

• Classes should inherit from appropriate base classes (e.g.,

  BaseAgent

  )
• Database models should be in

  app/models/database/

Step 3: Review Each File Systematically

For each changed file, perform the following checks:

Security Review (OWASP Top 10)

Check for common security vulnerabilities:

1. Injection Flaws (SQL, Command, LDAP, etc.)

   • Look for string concatenation in SQL queries
   • Check for unsanitized user input in shell commands
   • Verify parameterized queries are used with SQLAlchemy

2. Broken Authentication

   • Check for weak password validation
   • Verify proper session management
   • Look for exposed credentials or API keys

3. Sensitive Data Exposure

   • Check for unencrypted sensitive data storage
   • Verify HTTPS/TLS usage for data transmission
   • Look for logging of sensitive information

4. XML External Entities (XXE)

   • Check XML parsing for external entity processing
   • Verify XML parsers are configured securely

5. Broken Access Control

   • Check for missing authorization checks
   • Verify proper user permission validation
   • Look for insecure direct object references

6. Security Misconfiguration

   • Check for default credentials
   • Verify error messages don't expose sensitive info
   • Look for overly permissive CORS settings

7. Cross-Site Scripting (XSS)

   • Check for unescaped user input in templates
   • Verify proper output encoding
   • Look for dangerous innerHTML usage

8. Insecure Deserialization

   • Check for pickle/eval usage with untrusted data
   • Verify proper input validation

9. Using Components with Known Vulnerabilities

   • Check for outdated dependencies
   • Verify no known vulnerable libraries

10. Insufficient Logging & Monitoring

    • Check for proper error logging
    • Verify security events are logged

Performance Review

Check for performance issues:

1. Algorithmic Complexity

   • Look for nested loops that could be O(N²) or worse
   • Check for repeated calculations that could be cached
   • Verify efficient data structure usage

2. ORM Optimization

   • Check for N+1 query problems (missing eager loading)
   • Look for queries inside loops
   • Verify proper use of

     joinedload()

     or

     selectinload()

   • Check for loading entire tables when only a few fields needed
   • Verify proper indexing on foreign keys

3. Database Issues

   • Look for missing indexes on frequently queried columns
   • Check for inefficient WHERE clauses
   • Verify proper transaction boundaries

4. Memory Issues

   • Check for memory leaks (unclosed files, connections)
   • Look for loading large datasets into memory
   • Verify generators are used for large iterations

Logic and Bug Review

Check for logical errors:

1. Type Safety

   • Verify proper type handling
   • Check for None/null handling
   • Look for type coercion issues

2. Error Handling

   • Verify proper exception handling
   • Check for caught-but-ignored exceptions
   • Look for overly broad exception catches

3. Business Logic

   • Verify code matches intended behavior
   • Check for off-by-one errors
   • Look for race conditions or concurrency issues
   • Verify proper state management

4. Edge Cases

   • Check for empty list/array handling
   • Verify boundary condition handling
   • Look for division by zero possibilities

Project Standards Review

Verify adherence to project standards based on file type:

Python Files:

• Imports follow the pattern in claude.md
• SQLAlchemy models inherit from Base
• Proper use of relationships and foreign keys
• Models are in correct directory (

  app/models/database/

  )
• Agent classes inherit from

  BaseAgent

  or appropriate base class
• Minimal dependencies, prefer core libraries

General:

• Code follows existing patterns in the codebase
• Proper documentation and docstrings
• Consistent naming conventions
• Appropriate separation of concerns

Step 4: Categorize and Report Issues

Categorize issues into severity levels:

Critical (Fix Immediately):

• Security vulnerabilities that could lead to data breach or system compromise
• Logic bugs that would cause data corruption or system failure
• Performance issues that would cause severe degradation (e.g., O(N³) in hot path)
• ORM issues causing catastrophic N+1 queries
• Moderate security issues (information disclosure, weak validation)
• Significant performance problems (O(N²) where N could be large)
• Logic bugs that affect core functionality
• Violations of critical project standards

Recommended (Prompt for Approval):

• Minor performance improvements
• Code style issues
• Non-critical standard violations
• Suggestions for better maintainability

Step 5: Take Action

For Critical and Important Issues:

1. Fix the issue immediately
2. Explain what was wrong and why it was fixed
3. Show the before/after code
4. Reference relevant standards or security principles

For Recommended Issues:

1. List the issues clearly
2. Explain the potential benefit of fixing
3. Ask user if they want these fixed
4. Let user decide priority

Example Review Output

When presenting findings, use this format:

## Code Review Results

### Files Reviewed
- app/services/user_service.py
- app/models/database/user.py

### Critical Issues Fixed

#### 1. SQL Injection in user_service.py:42
**Issue:** Raw string concatenation in SQL query allows SQL injection
**Before:**
```python
query = f"SELECT * FROM users WHERE email = '{email}'"

After:

query = session.query(User).filter(User.email == email)

Why: Parameterized queries prevent SQL injection attacks (OWASP #1)

2. N+1 Query in user_service.py:78

Issue: Loading related data in loop causes N+1 queries Before:

for user in users:
    posts = user.posts  # Lazy load triggers query

After:

users = session.query(User).options(joinedload(User.posts)).all()
for user in users:
    posts = user.posts  # Already loaded

Why: Reduces database round trips from N+1 to 1 query

Recommended Improvements

1. Import Optimization (user_service.py:1)

• Consider using built-in

  datetime

  instead of

  arrow

  library
• Aligns with project preference for core libraries over PyPI packages
• Would you like me to refactor this?

2. Code Style (user.py:15)

• Consider adding docstring to

  User

  class
• Would improve code documentation
• Should I add this?

## Tips for Effective Reviews

1. **Be Thorough**: Check every changed line, not just the obvious parts
2. **Context Matters**: Understand the purpose of the code before critiquing
3. **Prioritize Severity**: Fix security and correctness issues before style
4. **Explain Reasoning**: Always explain why something is a problem
5. **Provide Solutions**: Don't just identify issues, show how to fix them
6. **Respect Intent**: Understand what the developer was trying to achieve
7. **Check Imports**: Verify all necessary imports are present after fixes
8. **Test Compatibility**: Ensure fixes don't break existing functionality