name: "PR Code Review"
description: "Three-dimensional parallel review: code quality, security, performance → unified verdict"

agents_dir: "agency-agents"

llm:
  provider: deepseek
  model: deepseek-chat
  max_tokens: 4096

concurrency: 3

inputs:
  - name: pr_diff
    description: "PR diff content (code changes)"
    required: true
  - name: pr_description
    description: "PR description (what changed, why, scope of impact)"
    required: true

steps:
  - id: code_quality
    role: "engineering/engineering-code-reviewer"
    task: |
      Review the following PR for code quality.

      ## PR Description
      {{pr_description}}

      ## Code Changes
      {{pr_diff}}

      Evaluate across these dimensions:
      1. **Style & conventions**: naming clarity, consistency, adherence to project conventions
      2. **Logic correctness**: edge cases, error handling, logical flaws
      3. **Maintainability**: complexity, function decomposition, duplication
      4. **Readability**: comment quality, intent clarity
      5. **Test coverage**: critical paths, edge cases

      For each dimension provide a score (1-5) and a concrete list of issues.
    output: quality_report

  - id: security_check
    role: "engineering/engineering-security-engineer"
    task: |
      Review the following PR for security risks.

      ## PR Description
      {{pr_description}}

      ## Code Changes
      {{pr_diff}}

      Focus on:
      1. **Injection risks**: SQL injection, XSS, command injection, etc.
      2. **Authn/authz**: permission checks, privilege escalation paths
      3. **Data security**: sensitive data encryption, log leakage
      4. **Dependency safety**: newly introduced packages with known CVEs
      5. **Config safety**: hardcoded secrets, insecure defaults

      For each issue mark severity (high/medium/low) and give a remediation suggestion.
    output: security_report

  - id: perf_check
    role: "testing/testing-performance-benchmarker"
    task: |
      Review the following PR for performance impact.

      ## PR Description
      {{pr_description}}

      ## Code Changes
      {{pr_diff}}

      Focus on:
      1. **Algorithmic efficiency**: time/space complexity
      2. **Resource usage**: memory, file handles, DB connections
      3. **Concurrency safety**: race conditions, deadlock risk
      4. **I/O performance**: N+1 queries, redundant calls
      5. **Caching opportunities**: cacheable paths that aren't cached

      For each finding, include an impact estimate and an optimization suggestion.
    output: perf_report

  - id: summary
    role: "engineering/engineering-code-reviewer"
    task: |
      Synthesize the three reviews into a final verdict.

      ## Code Quality
      {{quality_report}}

      ## Security
      {{security_report}}

      ## Performance
      {{perf_report}}

      Output (markdown):

      ### Verdict: [✅ Mergeable / ⚠️ Needs changes / ❌ Needs rewrite]

      ### Scorecard
      | Dimension | Score (1-5) | Key findings |
      |-----------|-------------|--------------|
      | Code quality | | |
      | Security | | |
      | Performance | | |

      ### Must fix (blocking)
      1. [severity] issue → fix suggestion

      ### Nice to have (non-blocking)
      1. issue → suggestion

      ### Highlights
      - Things worth calling out positively
    depends_on: [code_quality, security_check, perf_check]
    output: final_review