Code Review Expert

Perform a structured review of the current git changes with focus on SOLID principles, architecture, removal candidates, security risks, and Python-specific issues. Tailored for the Relax project (PyTorch distributed training, Ray actors, ML pipeline code).

Default to review-only output unless the user asks to implement changes.

For project structure, coupling points, and key files, see AGENTS.md.

Severity Levels

Level	Name	Description	Action
P0	Critical	Security vulnerability, data loss risk, correctness bug, training corruption	Must block merge
P1	High	Logic error, significant SOLID violation, performance regression, gradient issues	Should fix before merge
P2	Medium	Code smell, maintainability concern, minor SOLID violation, missing type hints	Fix in this PR or create follow-up
P3	Low	Style, naming, documentation, minor suggestion	Optional improvement

---

Workflow

1) Preflight Context

• Use git status -sb, git diff --stat, and git diff to scope changes.
• If needed, use rg or grep to find related modules, usages, and contracts.
• Identify entry points, ownership boundaries, and critical paths (training loop, loss computation, checkpoint saving).

Edge cases:

• No changes: Ask if they want to review staged changes or a specific commit range.
• Large diff (>500 lines): Summarize by file first, then review in batches.
• Cross-package changes: When multiple relax/ subpackages are modified, verify import compatibility first.

2) SOLID + Architecture Smells

• Load references/solid-checklist.md for specific prompts.
• When you propose a refactor, explain why it improves cohesion/coupling and outline a minimal, safe split.
• If refactor is non-trivial, propose an incremental plan instead of a large rewrite.

3) Removal Candidates + Iteration Plan

• Load references/removal-plan.md for template.
• Identify code that is unused, redundant, or feature-flagged off.
• Distinguish safe delete now vs defer with plan.

4) Security and Reliability Scan

• Load references/security-checklist.md for coverage.
• Check for: command injection, path traversal, pickle deserialization, secret leakage, race conditions, distributed race conditions.
• Call out both exploitability and impact.

5) Python-Specific Quality Scan

• Load references/code-quality-checklist.md for coverage.
• Check for: missing type hints, exception handling issues, resource management, mutable defaults, import problems.

6) ML/Training-Specific Scan

• Load references/python-ml-checklist.md for coverage.
• Check for: shape/dtype/device mismatches, gradient issues, memory leaks, distributed training bugs, numerical stability.

7) Output Format

## Code Review Summary

**Files reviewed**: X files, Y lines changed
**Overall assessment**: [APPROVE / REQUEST_CHANGES / COMMENT]

---

## Findings

### P0 - Critical
(none or list)

### P1 - High
1. **[file:line]** Brief title
   - Description of issue
   - Suggested fix

### P2 - Medium
...

### P3 - Low
...

---

## Removal/Iteration Plan
(if applicable)

Clean review: If no issues found, state what was checked and any residual risks.

8) Next Steps Confirmation

After presenting findings, ask user how to proceed:

1. Fix all - Implement all suggested fixes
2. Fix P0/P1 only - Address critical and high priority issues
3. Fix specific items - User specifies which issues to fix
4. No changes - Review complete

Important: Do NOT implement any changes until user explicitly confirms.

---

Resources

File	Purpose
solid-checklist.md	SOLID smell prompts and refactor heuristics for Python
security-checklist.md	Python security and runtime risk checklist
code-quality-checklist.md	Python-specific error handling, performance, boundary conditions
removal-plan.md	Template for deletion candidates and follow-up plan
python-ml-checklist.md	PyTorch/ML-specific issues for distributed training