Review Pr

Review a pull request

Review pull request #$ARGUMENTS (if no number was given, ask for one) by following the

project's shared playbook. Do not reimplement the procedure here — read and follow the

playbook, which is the single source of truth shared with the other AI tools.

Procedure

• Read the playbook docs/context/workflow/review-pr.md and follow every step: fetch the

PR data, read the linked issue, load only the relevant docs/context/{js,php} convention

docs (per the scope map), inspect the changed files, judge against the checklist, and produce

the structured review.

• Fetch the PR: run gh pr view $ARGUMENTS --json number,title,body,author,baseRefName,headRefName,files,additions,deletions,commits

and gh pr diff $ARGUMENTS in parallel. Stop and ask the user if the PR is missing or the

diff is empty.

• Read the linked issue: the PR body (per .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md) links it

under "Addresses issue: - #<number>". Extract that number, run

gh issue view <number> --json title,body,labels, and parse its Acceptance criteria,

Implementation Brief, and Test Coverage — this is the spec the PR must satisfy. If no issue

is linked, note it and review conventions + code quality only.

• Grade the change against docs/context/workflow/review-checklist.md — requirements

adherence (against the issue) first, then conventions, code quality, and verification —

citing the context file + section for every deviation.

• Output the review in the exact structure defined by the playbook (Summary → Requirements

Adherence → Principles Compliance → Code Quality → Security → Performance → Test Coverage →

Nits → Verdict).

Important

• Read-only: produce the review only. Never post comments, approve, or change the PR state

on GitHub unless the user explicitly asks.

• Load only the convention docs the change touches — read what the PR touches, not everything.