Review Changes

Reviews a branch's tip commit using live library/language docs from Context7 (via HTTP API) instead of training-data assumptions.

Requirements

• CONTEXT7_API_KEY env var must be set. Find it in the root .env.local file. If missing, tell the user and stop.
• Target must be a git repo with the branch present locally (fetch if needed).

Quick start

/review-changes <branch>

If no branch is given, ask which branch to review — never guess.

Workflow

1. Resolve the commit

   • git fetch origin <branch> (best effort, ignore failure if no remote)
   • git log -1 --format='%H %s' <branch> — the tip commit to review
   • git show --stat <branch> and git diff <branch>~1 <branch> for the full diff

2. Identify languages/libraries touched

   • From changed file extensions (.ts/.tsx → TypeScript, .py → Python, etc.)
   • From import/require statements added in the diff, to spot specific libraries (e.g. react-hook-form, sqlalchemy, strawberry-graphql)

3. Pull Context7 docs for each language/library identified

   • Search: GET https://context7.com/api/v2/libs/search?libraryName=<name> header Authorization: Bearer $CONTEXT7_API_KEY → returns candidate ids
   • Fetch context: GET https://context7.com/api/v2/context?libraryId=<id>&query=<natural-language-question-about-the-diff>&type=json
   • Ask a targeted question per library, e.g. "recommended pattern for async SQLAlchemy session handling" rather than a generic one — better results.
   • Use WebFetch for both calls since no Context7 MCP tool is registered in this environment; if an MCP tool named mcp__context7__* ever appears via ToolSearch, prefer it over raw HTTP.

4. Review the diff against fetched docs and this repo's CLAUDE.md rules

   • Flag deviations from official library/language best practices, citing the specific Context7 snippet that contradicts the code.
   • Flag deviations from this repo's CLAUDE.md conventions (strict TS, no any, layer separation in the FastAPI backend, etc.) — these take priority over generic best practice when they conflict.
   • Skip nitpicks Prettier/Ruff/ESLint already enforce.

5. Report inline in chat (see Output format) — do not write a report file.

Output format

## Review: <branch> @ <short-sha> — "<commit subject>"

### Findings
- [file:line] <issue> — <Context7-sourced recommendation, with library name>
- ...

### Clean
<one line confirming what's fine, or omit section if everything has findings>

If no issues found, say so plainly — don't invent filler findings.

Notes

• This skill reviews one commit (the branch tip), not the whole branch history. If the user wants a full PR review across multiple commits, point them to the existing code-review or review skill instead.
• If Context7 returns no useful match for a library, fall back to the language-level docs (e.g. plain "typescript" or "python") rather than skipping the review entirely.