code-review

name Code Review description Review code for AEM Edge Delivery Services projects. Use for self-review before committing, or to review pull requests with one-click GitHub suggestions. Code Review Review code for AEM Edge Delivery Services (EDS) projects. Modes Mode 1: Self-Review (Local Development) Use before committing to catch issues early. Invoke: /code-review (no PR number) Process: git status # See modified files git diff # See changes git diff --staged # See staged changes Output: Report issues directly so the developer can fix them before committing. Optional - Capture screenshots for visual validation: cd .claude/skills/code-review/scripts npm install node capture-screenshots.js https://{branch}--helix-tools-website--adobe.aem.page/{path} Mode 2: PR Review (Automated or Manual) Use to review an existing pull request. Invoke: /code-review <PR-number> or automatically via GitHub Actions See Output Format → PR Review Mode below for the full process. Review Criteria PR Structure (PR mode only): Preview URL: https://{branch}--helix-tools-website--adobe.aem.page/{path} or https://{branch}--helix-tools-website--adobe.aem.live/{path} (both .aem.page and .aem.live are accepted) Clear description of what changed and why JavaScript: Linting passes (ESLint airbnb-base) No eslint-disable without justification No CSS in JavaScript (use CSS classes) No debug console.log statements aem.js must NOT be modified CSS: Linting passes (Stylelint) All selectors scoped to block: .block-name .selector No !important without justification Mobile-first with standard breakpoints (600px, 900px, 1200px) Security: No secrets committed No XSS vulnerabilities (sanitize user input) Performance: No libraries in critical path Consider IntersectionObserver for heavy operations For detailed checklists, see resources/review-checklist.md . Priority Levels BLOCKING: Must fix (security, linting failures, breaking changes) SHOULD FIX: High priority (performance, accessibility, code quality) CONSIDER: Nice-to-have improvements Output Format Self-Review Mode Report findings directly: ## Code Review ### Files Reviewed - `blocks/my-block/my-block.js` - `blocks/my-block/my-block.css` ### Issues Found **BLOCKING:** - `my-block.js:45` - Remove console.log debug statement **SHOULD FIX:** - `my-block.css:12` - Selector `.title` needs block scoping ### Ready to Commit? - [ ] Fix blocking issues above - [ ] Run `npm run lint` PR Review Mode Complete phases in order. No write API calls until Phase 2. Phase 1: Gather information gh pr view <PR-number> --json title,body,headRefName,files,headRefOid gh pr diff <PR-number> Read changed files for context. Complete your full analysis before proceeding. Phase 2: Clean up previous bot comments Fetch IDs first, then delete each one individually (avoid $(...) substitution): # Inline review comments gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<PR-number>/comments --jq '[.[] | select(.user.login == "claude[bot]") | .id] | .[]' # For each id returned: gh api -X DELETE repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/comments/<id> # Issue-level comments gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/<PR-number>/comments --jq '[.[] | select(.user.login == "claude[bot]") | .id] | .[]' # For each id returned: gh api -X DELETE repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/comments/<id> # Pending (unsubmitted draft) reviews — these are left behind when event field is missing gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<PR-number>/reviews --jq '[.[] | select(.user.login == "claude[bot]" and .state == "PENDING") | .id] | .[]' # For each id returned: gh api -X DELETE repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<PR-number>/reviews/<id> Phase 3: Post inline suggestions Post a suggestion for every BLOCKING or SHOULD FIX issue where a concrete one-line-or-few-line fix exists . Inline suggestions are the primary output — the summary in Phase 4 should reference them, not replace them. Only skip a suggestion if: The fix spans multiple files or requires architectural changes The affected lines are not present in the diff (e.g. surrounding context lines only) position = 1-based line number counting from the @@ header line in the unified diff. Use the headRefOid value from Phase 1. Use the Write tool to create /tmp/review-comments.json with ALL fields (including commit_id and event ), then post with --input only — do NOT mix --field with --input as --field values are silently dropped when --input is used: gh api --method POST repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<PR-number>/reviews --input /tmp/review-comments.json /tmp/review-comments.json format: { "commit_id" : "<headRefOid from Phase 1>" , "event" : "COMMENT" , "comments" : [ { "path" : "FILE" , "position" : N , "body" : "**Fix:** REASON\n\n```suggestion\nCODE\n```" } ] } Phase 4: Post summary comment Use the Write tool to create /tmp/review-summary.md , then post: gh pr comment <PR-number> --body-file /tmp/review-summary.md Summary format: <!-- claude-code-review --> ## Code Review ### Issues Found - [List by severity: BLOCKING / SHOULD FIX / CONSIDER] ### Verdict [APPROVE / REQUEST CHANGES / COMMENT]