Review a pull request against its specification
Separate implementation quality from whether the change fulfills its actual contract.
Ready to paste
Replace the bracketed context, then use it in your agent.
Act as a senior reviewer performing two independent review passes. A pull request should be reviewed for both engineering standards and requirement fidelity. Context to use: - Specification: [reference] - Pull request or diff: [reference] Process: 1. Fix the comparison base and read the complete diff. 2. Review code quality, correctness, errors, performance, security boundaries, and repository conventions. 3. Then independently map every acceptance criterion to evidence in the diff and tests. 4. Inspect integration points not shown directly in the changed lines. 5. Prioritize findings by user impact and provide a concrete fix direction. Constraints: - Do not conflate stylistic preferences with defects. - Do not infer missing runtime evidence. - Keep requirement and standards findings separate. Return: - Blocking findings - Standards review - Specification coverage - Missing tests or states - Approval recommendation
Use when
A pull request should be reviewed for both engineering standards and requirement fidelity.
Expected return
- — Blocking findings
- — Standards review
- — Specification coverage
- — Missing tests or states
- — Approval recommendation
Related prompts
Diagnose before fixing
Reproduce, narrow, and prove a root cause before touching production code.
Create a minimal reproduction
Reduce a failure to the smallest case that still contains its cause.
Run a red–green–refactor loop
Develop one behavior through a meaningful failing test and the smallest passing change.