engineering-handbook/code-review.md
Adam Moussa 0333e7f8f5 Add engineering handbook
Conventions covering naming, git workflow, commit messages, pull
requests, code review, GitHub standards, AWS infrastructure, SAM
project layout, and secrets management. Commit messages section
adapted from RomuloOliveira/commit-messages-guide (CC-BY-4.0).
2026-05-02 16:42:44 -04:00

1.8 KiB

Code Review

Purpose

Code review exists to catch defects, share knowledge, and maintain consistency. It is not a gatekeeping exercise.

What Reviewers Should Look For

Always check

Watch for

  • Unused code, dead imports, or leftover debug statements
  • Missing or outdated README updates for functionality changes
  • Hardcoded values that should be in config or Secrets Manager
  • Security concerns (input validation, injection, overly broad IAM policies)

Don't nitpick

  • Minor formatting differences handled by linters
  • Personal style preferences that don't affect correctness
  • Naming choices that are reasonable even if you'd pick something different

Giving Feedback

  • Be specific. "This might fail if the list is empty" is useful. "Needs work" is not.
  • Distinguish between must-fix and suggestions. Prefix optional feedback with "nit:" or "suggestion:"
  • Ask questions instead of making assumptions. "Is this intentional?" is better than "This is wrong."
  • If a PR is good, say so. A simple "Looks good" is fine.

Turnaround

  • Aim to review within one business day of being requested
  • If you can't review in time, say so and suggest another reviewer
  • Don't let PRs sit in review for days without feedback

Approving

  • Approve when you're confident the change is correct and complete
  • If you left suggestions but the PR is otherwise good, approve with comments rather than blocking
  • One approval is sufficient for most changes