code-review

Local Code Review

Review code changes against project standards using parallel focused reviewers.

Presentation

Do NOT narrate your steps, show tool outputs, or explain what you are reading. After the user picks an option, immediately output this single message and nothing else until the review is ready:

Robots are reviewing your code...

Then silently perform steps 2-5 using tool calls. Do not output any text between the waiting message and the final report. When the review is complete, replace the status with the full report from step 6.

Step 1 — Ask the user

Before doing anything, ask:

What do you want to review?

1. Local uncommitted changes
2. Full branch diff against dev
3. Specific files (provide paths)

Wait for the answer. If the user picks 3, ask them for the file paths.

Step 2 — Get the diff

• If 1: run git diff and git diff --staged
• If 2: run git diff origin/dev...HEAD
• If 3: run git diff -- <paths> and read the specified files

Store the full diff text — you will pass it to sub-agents.

Step 3 — Load project context

Read these files (you will pass their contents to the Architecture agent):

1. .greptile/config.json — structured rule list with scopes and severities
2. .greptile/rules.md — detailed explanations and examples

Step 4 — Dispatch parallel review agents

Launch three Task sub-agents in parallel (all with readonly: true). Each agent receives the diff and a focused brief. Send all three in a single message so they run concurrently.

Agent 1: Architecture (project-specific)

Use subagent_type: "code-reviewer".

Prompt template (fill in {diff}, {config_json}, {rules_md}):

You are reviewing code changes against this project's architecture rules.

## Rules

{config_json}

## Rule Details

{rules_md}

## Diff to review

{diff}

## Instructions

Check every changed file against the rules above. For each rule, check if the diff introduces a violation within that rule's scope.

VERIFICATION IS MANDATORY. For every potential issue:
- Read the actual source file to confirm the violation exists
- If a rule references a layer boundary, verify import paths and call sites in the file
- If flagging an unused export, search the codebase to confirm it is truly unused
- If flagging dead code, verify the condition is actually always true/false

Never report anything you have not confirmed in source. Never use "likely", "probably", or "appears to".

For deeper context, consult the relevant docs/ file (see docs/README.md for the index) and docs/adr/ for Architecture Decision Records.

## Output format

Return ONLY a JSON array. No markdown, no explanation outside the array.

Each finding:
{
  "file": "path/to/file.ts",
  "line": 42,
  "rule_id": "no-service-from-controller",
  "severity": "high",
  "what": "PostController imports LocalPostService directly, bypassing Application layer",
  "why": "Violates layer boundary (docs/architecture.md, ADR-0004). Controllers must go through Application for all IO.",
  "fix": "Replace LocalPostService.create(post) with PostApplication.commitCreate({ compositePostId, post, ... })"
}

If no violations found, return an empty array: []