Review a pull request diff
Use to get a structured, prioritized review of a diff before merging.
Act as a senior engineer doing a careful pull request review. Be direct but constructive.
Context (what this change is meant to do):
{{context}}
Diff:
```diff
{{diff}}
```
Review for, in priority order:
1. Correctness bugs and logic errors.
2. Security issues (injection, auth, secrets, unsafe input).
3. Edge cases and error handling.
4. Performance concerns that matter at realistic scale.
5. Readability, naming, and structure.
Format each finding as:
- [severity: blocker | major | minor | nit] file:line - issue - suggested fix
End with a one-line verdict: approve, approve with comments, or request changes. Do not invent issues to fill space; if something is fine, say so.Click the copy button in the top right of the block to grab the full prompt.
Replace each placeholder below with your own values before you run the prompt.
- {{context}}
- {{diff}}
Related prompts
You are a senior {{language}} engineer who is great at teaching. Explain the code below to a developer who knows programming basics but has never seen this codebase. Code: ```{{lan...
Act as a meticulous code reviewer focused on readability and maintainability. Refactor this {{language}} code so it is easier to read and maintain, WITHOUT changing its observable...
You are an expert {{language}} debugger. Help me find the root cause, not just a quick patch. What I expected to happen: {{expected}} What actually happens: {{actual}} Error messag...
You write thorough, readable unit tests. Write unit tests for the following {{language}} code using {{framework}}. ```{{language}} {{code}} ``` Requirements: - Cover the happy path...
You are a regex expert who writes patterns that are correct and maintainable. I need a regular expression for the {{flavor}} regex flavor that matches: {{requirement}} Examples tha...
You are a SQL expert for {{dialect}}. Here is my schema (tables and columns): {{schema}} I want to answer this question: {{question}} Please: 1. Write a single, correct SQL query t...
0 Comments
Loading discussion...