@prpm-converter/cursorrules-requesting-code-review

# Requesting Code Review - Cursor Rules

---

## Overview

This cursor rule is based on the Claude Code "Requesting Code Review" skill, adapted for use in Cursor IDE.

## Core Methodology

When working on code, follow this requesting code review methodology:

1. *Subagent-Driven Development:**
2. Review after EACH task
3. Catch issues before they compound
4. Fix before moving to next task
5. *Executing Plans:**
6. Review after each batch (3 tasks)
7. Get feedback, apply, continue
8. *Ad-Hoc Development:**
9. Review before merge
10. Review when stuck
11. *Never:**
12. Skip review because "it's simple"
13. Ignore Critical issues
14. Proceed with unfixed Important issues
15. Argue with valid technical feedback
16. *If reviewer wrong:**
17. Push back with technical reasoning
18. Show code/tests that prove it works
19. Request clarification

## Principles

- Apply best practices from the skill content below

## Implementation Guidelines

- Reference the detailed skill content for specific guidance



## Integration with Other Rules

This rule works best when combined with:
- Code quality and style guidelines
- Testing best practices
- Project-specific conventions

You can reference other .cursorrules files by organizing them in your project:
```
.cursorrules/
  ├── base/
  │   ├── requesting-code-review.cursorrules (this file)
  │   └── code-quality.cursorrules
  └── project-specific.cursorrules
```

## Original Skill Content

The following is the complete content from the Claude Code skill for reference:

---

---
name: requesting-code-review
description: Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements - dispatches code-reviewer subagent to review implementation against plan or requirements before proceeding
---

# Requesting Code Review

Dispatch code-reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade.

**Core principle:** Review early, review often.

## When to Request Review

**Mandatory:**
- After each task in subagent-driven development
- After completing major feature
- Before merge to main

**Optional but valuable:**
- When stuck (fresh perspective)
- Before refactoring (baseline check)
- After fixing complex bug

## How to Request

**1. Get git SHAs:**
```bash
BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1)  # or origin/main
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
```

**2. Dispatch code-reviewer subagent:**

Use Task tool with code-reviewer type, fill template at `code-reviewer.md`

**Placeholders:**
- `{WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED}` - What you just built
- `{PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS}` - What it should do
- `{BASE_SHA}` - Starting commit
- `{HEAD_SHA}` - Ending commit
- `{DESCRIPTION}` - Brief summary

**3. Act on feedback:**
- Fix Critical issues immediately
- Fix Important issues before proceeding
- Note Minor issues for later
- Push back if reviewer is wrong (with reasoning)

## Example

```
[Just completed Task 2: Add verification function]

You: Let me request code review before proceeding.

BASE_SHA=$(git log --oneline | grep "Task 1" | head -1 | awk '{print $1}')
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

[Dispatch code-reviewer subagent]
  WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED: Verification and repair functions for conversation index
  PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from docs/plans/deployment-plan.md
  BASE_SHA: a7981ec
  HEAD_SHA: 3df7661
  DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types

[Subagent returns]:
  Strengths: Clean architecture, real tests
  Issues:
    Important: Missing progress indicators
    Minor: Magic number (100) for reporting interval
  Assessment: Ready to proceed

You: [Fix progress indicators]
[Continue to Task 3]
```

## Integration with Workflows

**Subagent-Driven Development:**
- Review after EACH task
- Catch issues before they compound
- Fix before moving to next task

**Executing Plans:**
- Review after each batch (3 tasks)
- Get feedback, apply, continue

**Ad-Hoc Development:**
- Review before merge
- Review when stuck

## Red Flags

**Never:**
- Skip review because "it's simple"
- Ignore Critical issues
- Proceed with unfixed Important issues
- Argue with valid technical feedback

**If reviewer wrong:**
- Push back with technical reasoning
- Show code/tests that prove it works
- Request clarification

See template at: requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md


---

## Usage Notes

- Apply these principles consistently throughout development
- Adapt the methodology to fit your specific project context
- Combine with project-specific rules for best results
- Use this as a reference for the requesting code review approach

---
*Converted from Claude Code Skill: requesting-code-review*
*Source: requesting code review skill*