Requesting Code Review
Dispatch superpowers:code-reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade.
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
- Get git SHAs:
BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1) # or origin/main HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
- 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
- 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/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