skills/github/github-code-review/references/review-output-template.md
Use this as the structure for PR review summary comments. Copy and fill in the sections.
## Code Review Summary
**Verdict: [Approved ā
| Changes Requested š“ | Reviewed š¬]** ([N] issues, [N] suggestions)
**PR:** #[number] ā [title]
**Author:** @[username]
**Files changed:** [N] (+[additions] -[deletions])
### š“ Critical
<!-- Issues that MUST be fixed before merge -->
- **file.py:line** ā [description]. Suggestion: [fix].
### ā ļø Warnings
<!-- Issues that SHOULD be fixed, but not strictly blocking -->
- **file.py:line** ā [description].
### š” Suggestions
<!-- Non-blocking improvements, style preferences, future considerations -->
- **file.py:line** ā [description].
### ā
Looks Good
<!-- Call out things done well ā positive reinforcement -->
- [aspect that was done well]
---
*Reviewed by Hermes Agent*
| Level | Icon | When to use | Blocks merge? |
|---|---|---|---|
| Critical | š“ | Security vulnerabilities, data loss risk, crashes, broken core functionality | Yes |
| Warning | ā ļø | Bugs in non-critical paths, missing error handling, missing tests for new code | Usually yes |
| Suggestion | š” | Style improvements, refactoring ideas, performance hints, documentation gaps | No |
| Looks Good | ā | Clean patterns, good test coverage, clear naming, smart design decisions | N/A |
Prefix inline comments with the severity icon so they're scannable:
š“ **Critical:** User input passed directly to SQL query ā use parameterized queries to prevent injection.
ā ļø **Warning:** This error is silently swallowed. At minimum, log it.
š” **Suggestion:** This could be simplified with a dict comprehension:
`{k: v for k, v in items if v is not None}`
ā
**Nice:** Good use of context manager here ā ensures cleanup on exceptions.
When reviewing locally before push, use the same structure but present it as a message to the user instead of a PR comment. Skip the PR metadata header and just start with the severity sections.