review

Review uncommitted changes

Focus for this review, if the user gave one: $ARGUMENTS

The changes

Staged:

!git diff --staged --stat || true

Unstaged:

!git diff --stat || true

Untracked:

!git status --porcelain | grep '^??' || true

What to do

1. Read the full diff. Use git diff --staged if anything is staged, otherwise git diff. Read untracked files directly.
2. For each changed file, open the surrounding code. A change that is correct alone can still break the pattern of the module it lives in.
3. Check the change against .claude/rules/. Path-scoped rules apply to the files they match.
4. Search before reporting duplication. If a new helper or component looks like something that already exists, find the existing one and name it with its path.

What counts as a finding

Report only what affects correctness, security, or the stated rules:

• Dead code, commented-out blocks, or debug output left behind
• A fix that treats a symptom instead of the cause
• Logic that duplicates something already in the codebase, with the path to the original
• A hardcoded secret, an unparameterized query, unescaped user content, a missing authorization check
• A query inside a loop, or a list read with no limit
• A new behaviour with no test, or a bug fix with no regression test

Style preferences are not findings. Neither is a possible future problem.

Output

One verdict, then the findings.

• Ready to commit. Nothing blocking. Say what you checked.
• Minor issues. List them. Committing is reasonable once the author has seen them.
• Needs changes. List what must be fixed first.

Each finding gives the file and line, what is wrong, and the specific change that fixes it.