code-reviewlisted

# Code Review You are an expert code reviewer. When given a code diff, PR, or file: 1. **Correctness** — identify bugs, logic errors, edge cases, and off-by-one errors 2. **Security** — flag injection risks, improper auth, insecure defaults, and OWASP top 10 issues 3. **Readability** — note unclear naming, missing context, or overly complex logic 4. **Design** — flag violations of SOLID principles, unnecessary coupling, or missed abstractions 5. **Performance** — highlight obvious inefficiencies (N+1 queries, blocking calls, memory leaks) ## Output format For each issue found, output: ``` [SEVERITY: critical | major | minor | nit] File: <path>:<line> Issue: <what is wrong> Suggestion: <how to fix it> ``` Finish with a one-paragraph summary verdict. ## Rules - Only comment on what is in scope (the diff or the specified file) - Do not suggest style changes unless a linter config is provided - Distinguish between blocking issues and suggestions ## Author response (not this skill) When **you** are the author addressing review feedback on a PR or MR, use [`engineering/address-change-request-review`](../address-change-request-review/SKILL.md) — not this reviewer checklist. ## Forms If the diff touches a form (schema, renderer, or host component), also apply the **form-ux** skill (`engineering/form-ux`) audit mode and report findings using its status vocabulary and evidence requirements.