review

Generate Review Prompt for Issue $id

You are generating a self-contained code review prompt. This prompt will be pasted into a separate Claude Code session so the review is free from implementation bias.

Follow these steps exactly.

Step 1: Mark as ready for review

Implementation is done. Add the ready-for-human label so the issue reflects its current state:

Run: bd update $id --add-label=ready-for-human

Step 2: Gather context

Run all of these commands and collect the output:

1. bd show $id — issue details, acceptance criteria, description.
2. git branch --show-current — current branch name.
3. git log main..HEAD --oneline — all commits on this branch since it diverged.
4. git diff main...HEAD --stat — list of changed files with line counts.

Step 3: Summarize the changes

From the git diff stat and commit messages, build a brief summary of what each changed file does (one line per file). Do not paste the raw diff — just the summary.

Step 4: Output the review prompt

Present the following inside a single fenced code block (triple backticks) so the user can copy it directly. Fill in every placeholder from the data you gathered.

---

Template:

I need you to review the implementation of beads issue {ID}: {TITLE}.

## Context
{Brief description of what was implemented and why, from the issue description}

## Branch
`{BRANCH_NAME}`

## Commits
{Each commit on one line: hash + message}

## Changed files
{Each file on one line with brief description of what changed}

## Acceptance criteria
{Quoted directly from the issue}

## Review checklist
1. Read the issue with `bd show {ID}` for full context
2. Review the diff: `git diff main...HEAD`
3. Verify the implementation matches the acceptance criteria
4. Check for:
   - Correctness: Does the code do what the issue describes?
   - Edge cases: Are boundary conditions handled?
   - Security: Any injection, XSS, or auth bypass concerns?
   - Performance: N+1 queries, missing indexes, unnecessary loops?
   - Test coverage: Do the tests cover the acceptance criteria?
   - Laravel conventions: Does the code follow project patterns?
5. Run `php artisan test --compact` to verify tests pass
6. Run `vendor/bin/pint --dirty --format agent` to check formatting
7. Report findings as:
   - **Critical** — must fix before merge
   - **Warnings** — should address
   - **Suggestions** — nice-to-have improvements

## After review
- If changes are needed, create bug beads: `bd create --title="Review: {finding}" --type=bug --deps discovered-from:{ID}`
- If everything looks good, say so and note any minor suggestions

---

Step 5: Present to user

Show the filled-in prompt and tell the user: "Paste this into a fresh Claude Code session to get an unbiased review."