> ## Documentation Index > Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://docs.namastex.ai/llms.txt > Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further. # Code Review Workflow > Multi-agent PR review for comprehensive code quality ## Overview Code review with Forge uses multiple AI agents as additional reviewers, each bringing different perspectives. Combine human judgment with AI analysis to catch more issues and ship higher quality code. *** ## The Multi-Agent Review Process ```mermaid theme={null} graph LR A[Create PR] --> B[Auto-Review Task] B --> C[Multiple Agent Reviews] C --> D[Aggregate Feedback] D --> E[Human Review] E --> F{Approve?} F -->|Yes| G[Merge] F -->|No| H[Address Feedback] H --> B ``` *** ## Step 1: Prepare for Review Before requesting review, ensure your PR is review-ready. \###Pre-Review Checklist ```bash theme={null} # Create pre-review task forge task create \ --title "Pre-review checklist for PR #123" \ --description "$(cat < ```bash theme={null} forge task create \ --title "Security review: PR #123 authentication changes" \ --description "Review for: SQL injection, XSS, auth bypasses, secret exposure" \ --agent claude-code \ --labels "review,security" \ --attach-pr 123 ``` **Claude excels at:** * Security vulnerabilities * Logic errors * Edge cases * Complex algorithms ```bash theme={null} forge task create \ --title "Performance review: PR #123" \ --description "Check for: N+1 queries, memory leaks, inefficient algorithms" \ --agent gemini \ --labels "review,performance" \ --attach-pr 123 ``` **Gemini excels at:** * Performance issues * Resource usage * Scalability concerns * Quick scans ```bash theme={null} forge task create \ --title "Best practices review: PR #123" \ --description "Check: Code style, patterns, naming, structure" \ --agent cursor-cli \ --labels "review,quality" \ --attach-pr 123 ``` **Cursor excels at:** * Modern patterns * Framework best practices * Code organization * TypeScript idioms ```bash theme={null} forge task create \ --title "Test coverage review: PR #123" \ --description "Verify: Test coverage, edge cases, integration tests" \ --agent claude-code \ --specialized-agent "test-reviewer" \ --labels "review,testing" \ --attach-pr 123 ``` **Test reviewer checks:** * Test coverage percentage * Missing edge cases * Test quality * Integration test gaps *** ## Step 3: Run Reviews in Parallel Execute all reviews simultaneously for faster feedback. ```bash theme={null} # Launch all review tasks at once forge task start-batch \ task-security \ task-performance \ task-best-practices \ task-testing \ --parallel # Monitor progress forge task watch-batch --all-reviews # Results ready in ~5-10 minutes ``` *** ## Step 4: Aggregate Feedback Collect and organize feedback from all agents. ### Example Review Aggregation ```bash theme={null} forge task create \ --title "Aggregate all PR #123 reviews" \ --description "Combine feedback from all agents into single report" \ --agent gemini \ --depends-on task-security,task-performance,task-best-practices,task-testing ``` **Aggregated Report Structure:** ```markdown theme={null} # PR #123 Review Summary ## 🔴 Critical Issues (3) 1. **[Security]** SQL injection vulnerability in user search - Agent: Claude Code - File: `src/api/users.ts:45` - Fix: Use parameterized queries 2. **[Performance]** N+1 query in order list endpoint - Agent: Gemini - File: `src/api/orders.ts:120` - Fix: Use eager loading with joins 3. **[Testing]** Missing tests for error scenarios - Agent: Test Reviewer - Coverage: 45% (target: 80%) - Fix: Add error case tests ## 🟡 Medium Issues (7) ... ## 🟢 Minor Issues (12) ... ## ✅ Positive Feedback - Good separation of concerns - Clear naming conventions - Comprehensive error handling ``` *** ## Step 5: Address Feedback Create tasks to address review feedback. ```bash theme={null} # Critical issues - fix immediately forge task create \ --title "Fix SQL injection in user search" \ --description "Use parameterized queries, validate input" \ --priority critical \ --agent claude-code \ --labels "bugfix,security" # Medium issues - fix before merge forge task create \ --title "Optimize order list query" \ --description "Replace N+1 with JOIN query" \ --priority high \ --agent gemini # Minor issues - address or defer forge task create \ --title "Improve variable naming in auth module" \ --priority low \ --agent cursor-cli \ --labels "refactor,nice-to-have" ``` *** ## Review Patterns for Different PR Types ```bash theme={null} # Comprehensive multi-agent review forge review create \ --pr 123 \ --agents claude-code,gemini,cursor-cli \ --focus security,performance,best-practices,testing \ --parallel ``` **Review Focus:** * Feature completeness * Test coverage * Security implications * Performance impact * Documentation ```bash theme={null} # Focus on regression prevention forge review create \ --pr 124 \ --agents claude-code,gemini \ --focus security,testing,regression \ --specialized-agent "bug-fix-reviewer" ``` **Review Focus:** * Root cause addressed * Regression tests added * No new bugs introduced * Similar bugs elsewhere ```bash theme={null} # Ensure no behavior changes forge review create \ --pr 125 \ --agents cursor-cli,claude-code \ --focus behavior-preservation,testing \ --require-benchmark ``` **Review Focus:** * All tests still pass * No behavior changes * Code quality improved * Performance not degraded ```bash theme={null} # Fast security/critical review only forge review create \ --pr 126 \ --agents claude-code \ --focus security,correctness \ --fast-track ``` **Review Focus:** * Fixes the critical issue * No new vulnerabilities * Minimal scope * Can be rolled back *** ## Specialized Review Agents Create custom review agents for specific needs. ### Creating a Custom Reviewer ```yaml theme={null} # .forge/agents/security-reviewer.yml name: security-reviewer description: "Security-focused code reviewer" base_agent: claude-code system_prompt: | You are a security-focused code reviewer. Review code for: OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities: - SQL Injection - XSS (Cross-Site Scripting) - CSRF - Authentication/Authorization flaws - Security misconfigurations - Sensitive data exposure - Insufficient logging - XML External Entities (XXE) - Broken access control - Using components with known vulnerabilities Also check for: - Hardcoded secrets - Weak cryptography - Insecure dependencies - Input validation - Output encoding - Rate limiting - Error message information leakage Provide specific, actionable feedback with: - Severity (Critical/High/Medium/Low) - Exact file and line number - Vulnerability explanation - Remediation steps - Example secure code checklist: - SQL injection prevention - XSS prevention - Authentication checks - Authorization checks - Input validation - Output encoding - Secret management - Dependency security ``` ### Using Custom Reviewers ```bash theme={null} forge task create \ --title "Deep security review: Payment processing PR" \ --agent claude-code \ --specialized-agent "security-reviewer" \ --attach-pr 127 ``` *** ## Review Automation ### Auto-Review on PR Creation ```yaml theme={null} # .forge/workflows/auto-review.yml name: Auto-Review PR on: pull_request: types: [opened, synchronize] jobs: multi-agent-review: runs-on: forge-server steps: - name: Security Review run: | forge task create \ --title "Security review: PR ${{ github.event.number }}" \ --agent claude-code \ --specialized-agent "security-reviewer" \ --attach-pr ${{ github.event.number }} \ --auto-comment - name: Performance Review run: | forge task create \ --title "Performance review: PR ${{ github.event.number }}" \ --agent gemini \ --specialized-agent "performance-reviewer" \ --attach-pr ${{ github.event.number }} \ --auto-comment - name: Best Practices Review run: | forge task create \ --title "Best practices review: PR ${{ github.event.number }}" \ --agent cursor-cli \ --attach-pr ${{ github.event.number }} \ --auto-comment - name: Aggregate Results run: | forge review aggregate \ --pr ${{ github.event.number }} \ --post-summary ``` ### GitHub Integration ```bash theme={null} # Configure Forge to comment on PRs forge config set github.auto_comment true forge config set github.review_threshold "critical,high" # Agents will automatically post comments ``` **Example Auto-Comment:** ````markdown theme={null} ## 🤖 Forge Security Review **Agent:** Claude Code (security-reviewer) **Status:** ⚠️ Issues Found ### 🔴 Critical Issues (1) **SQL Injection in User Search** - **File:** `src/api/users.ts` - **Line:** 45 - **Severity:** Critical **Current Code:** ```typescript const query = `SELECT * FROM users WHERE name = '${searchTerm}'`; ```` **Issue:** User input is directly interpolated into SQL query. **Fix:** ```typescript theme={null} const query = 'SELECT * FROM users WHERE name = ?'; const results = await db.query(query, [searchTerm]); ``` *** *Reviewed by Automagik Forge • [View Full Report](https://forge.example.com/reviews/123)* ```` --- ## Measuring Review Quality Track metrics to improve review process. ### Issue Detection Rate **Measure effectiveness:** ```bash forge analytics review-effectiveness --period last-30-days ```` **Metrics tracked:** * Issues caught by AI vs humans * False positive rate * Severity distribution * Time to fix ### Agent Performance **Compare agent effectiveness:** ```bash theme={null} forge analytics agent-review-performance ``` **Comparison:** * Claude: Best at security, logic * Gemini: Best at performance * Cursor: Best at patterns ### Review Coverage **Track review metrics:** ```bash theme={null} forge analytics review-coverage ``` **Metrics:** * Files reviewed per PR * Lines of code reviewed * Review time per PR * Issues found per KLOC *** ## Real-World Example: Complete PR Review ### Large Feature PR Review Workflow ```bash theme={null} # PR #150: Add payment processing with Stripe # Files changed: 25 # Lines: +1,200 -150 # Launch parallel reviews forge review create \ --pr 150 \ --agents claude-code,gemini,cursor-cli \ --specialized-agents security-reviewer,payment-specialist \ --parallel # Results: 45 minutes # - 2 critical security issues # - 8 high priority issues # - 15 medium issues # - 23 minor suggestions ``` ```bash theme={null} # Create fix tasks forge task create \ --title "Fix: Validate webhook signatures" \ --agent claude-code \ --priority critical forge task create \ --title "Fix: Add idempotency keys" \ --agent claude-code \ --priority critical # Push fixes # Re-run security review forge review rerun --pr 150 --agent security-reviewer # ✅ Critical issues resolved ``` ```markdown theme={null} # Human reviewer sees: - AI found 2 critical issues (now fixed) - 8 high priority items addressed - AI review notes on 15 medium items - Human focuses on: - Business logic correctness - UX considerations - Edge cases AI might miss - Overall architecture # Human review time: 30 minutes (vs 2 hours without AI) ``` ```bash theme={null} # All reviews passed # Human approved # Merge PR forge review complete --pr 150 --approved ``` *** ## Pro Tips Let AI catch the obvious issues first: ```bash theme={null} # ✅ Good workflow 1. Push PR 2. AI review runs automatically 3. Fix critical/high issues 4. Request human review 5. Human focuses on nuanced issues # ❌ Bad workflow 1. Push PR 2. Request human review immediately 3. Human finds obvious issues 4. Waste reviewer time ``` ```bash theme={null} # Only block merge on critical/high forge config set review.block_on "critical,high" # Auto-approve if only minor issues forge config set review.auto_approve_threshold "minor" ``` ```bash theme={null} # Stage 1: Quick scan (Gemini - 2 mins) # Stage 2: Deep dive (Claude - 10 mins) # Stage 3: Specialized (Custom agents - 15 mins) forge review create --pr 151 --staged \ --stage-1 gemini \ --stage-2 claude-code \ --stage-3 security-reviewer ``` ```bash theme={null} # Analyze what agents catch most often forge analytics common-issues --by-agent # Improve specialized agents based on patterns forge agent improve security-reviewer \ --based-on-history last-50-reviews ``` *** ## Next Steps Coordinate reviews across teams Automate reviews in your pipeline Create specialized review agents Set up GitHub PR integration *** **Remember**: AI agents are additional reviewers, not replacements for human judgment. They catch common issues quickly, freeing humans to focus on architecture, business logic, and user experience.