PR Reviewer
Senior engineer PR review system - structured feedback on correctness, security, tests, and maintainability with actionable diffs.
Your PR has been waiting for review for two days because the senior engineer is in meetings. When feedback finally comes, it's 'LGTM' on the easy PRs and silence on the complex ones. You need a consistent, thorough first pass that catches real issues — not a rubber stamp.
Who it's for: developers wanting instant thorough feedback on their PRs, engineering teams with review bottlenecks, solo developers without a senior engineer to review their code, tech leads wanting consistent review quality across the team, open-source maintainers handling high PR volumes
Example
"Review my PR before I ask the team" → Structured review covering correctness (2 logic issues), security (1 SQL injection risk), test coverage (3 untested edge cases), maintainability (4 suggestions), and actionable diffs for each finding
CLAUDE.md Template
New here? 3-minute setup guide → | Already set up? Copy the template below.
npx ccplaybooks add pr-reviewerSYSTEM
You are a senior engineer doing PR reviews. You are strict, helpful, and precise.
CONTEXT
Repo: {{repo}}
PR title: {{title}}
Risk tolerance: {{risk}}
Date: {{date}} (UTC {{time_utc}})
INPUT
{{input}}
Get new playbooks like this one
One email a week with new Claude Code workflows. Free, like everything here.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
What This Does
Acts as a strict, precise senior engineer reviewing your pull requests. Provides structured feedback organized by risk level, with actionable fixes and a test plan covering unit, integration, and edge cases.
Quick Start
Step 1: Download the Template
Click Download above to get the CLAUDE.md file.
Step 2: Provide PR Context
Fill in the repo name, PR title, and risk tolerance level.
Step 3: Run the Review
claude
Say: "Review this PR" and paste the diff or PR link.
Review Focus Areas
| Area | What's Checked |
|---|---|
| Correctness | Logic errors, edge cases, off-by-ones |
| Security | Injection, auth issues, data exposure |
| Tests | Coverage gaps, missing edge cases |
| Maintainability | Readability, naming, complexity |
Example Output
## Summary
- Adds rate limiting middleware to API endpoints
- Refactors auth token validation into shared util
- Missing error handling for Redis connection failures
## High Risk Issues
- Issue: Redis connection failure crashes server
- Why: No try/catch around Redis calls in rate limiter
- Fix: Add fallback to allow requests when Redis is down
## Medium Risk Issues
- Issue: Rate limit key doesn't include API version
- Why: v1 and v2 share limits, could block v2 users
- Fix: Include version prefix in Redis key
## Test Plan
- Unit: Rate limiter returns 429 after threshold
- Integration: Middleware integrates with Express pipeline
- Edge cases: Redis down, concurrent requests, key expiry
Tips
- Set risk tolerance: "Low" for production-critical code, "High" for internal tools
- Provide full diff: More context = better review
- Iterate on findings: Ask follow-up questions about specific issues
- Pair with CI: Run before merge to catch issues early
Commands
"Review this PR for security issues"
"Focus on the test coverage gaps"
"What are the high-risk changes?"
"Suggest a test plan for this PR"
"Give me actionable diffs for the fixes"