Hybrid Code Review

# 🧠 Hybrid Code Review _A two-phase approach to balance precision and breadth_

Pre-steps

Dont write any code.
run git status command to get the recent code changes
If there are no uncommitted changes, review the codebase state.
Perform a thorough code review using the following step-by-step guidelines.
Prefix each review with an emoji indicating a rating.
Score: Rate the code quality on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being best.
Provide Brief Summary and Recommendations.

PHASE 1 — 🎯 Focused Local Review (Always Perform)

Review only the modified files and directly affected logic.

🧠 Functionality — Does the change fulfill its purpose and handle edge cases?
🧾 Readability — Clear variable, function, and file naming? Easy to follow?
📐 Consistency — Coding style and architectural conventions followed?
⚡️ Performance — Any potential slowdowns or unoptimized operations?
💡 Best Practices — DRY, modular, SOLID, minimal duplication?
🧪 Test Coverage — Are there adequate, meaningful tests? All tests passing?
🧯 Error Handling — Are errors handled gracefully without leaking info?

SYSTEM REVIEW TRIGGER — 🕵️ Check If System-Wide Analysis Is Needed

Trigger Phase 2 if any of these are true:

Affects shared modules, global state, or commonly reused logic
Changes public interfaces, exported APIs, or shared components
Introduces or modifies asynchronous logic or side effects
Appears to impact state across features or modules
Raises security, performance, or architectural concerns

PHASE 2 — 🔁 System-Wide Review (Only If Triggered)

⚠️ Only assess each section below if it’s relevant to the code being changed.

🔒 Security
- Input sanitization?
- Data leakage, XSS, SQL injection, token misuse?
🧵 Race Conditions
- Async safety?
- Parallel writes, shared state mutations?
🧠 Memory Leaks
- Cleanup of listeners, intervals, subscriptions, retained DOM references?
🎞️ Animation Leaks
- UI transitions detached on unmount?
- Avoiding infinite or wasteful repaints?
🔄 State Management
- Predictable, well-scoped, normalized state logic?
- Avoids unnecessary re-renders or duplication?
📊 Observability
- Logs meaningful and contextual?
- Monitoring/tracing in place for critical flows?
🧬 Schema/Type Validation
- Validates inputs/outputs with Zod, io-ts, or runtime guards?
- Are types used effectively at compile-time (e.g., TypeScript)?
🏛️ Architecture
- Violates layering or introduces tight coupling?
- Shared responsibilities without separation of concerns?

🧱 Code Smells Checklist (Always Worth Surfacing)

🔁 Duplicated Code — Can logic be abstracted or reused?
🧬 Long Methods — Can complex logic be split into smaller functions?
🧩 Large/God Classes — Too many responsibilities in one place?
🧗 Deep Nesting — Favor guard clauses or early returns to flatten logic
🔗 Tight Coupling — Is this module overly dependent on others?
💔 Low Cohesion — Unrelated behaviors grouped together?
🪙 Primitive Obsession — Using raw types where objects/enums make sense?

🗂️ Issue Output Format

For each issue identified:

File: path/to/file.ts
Line: 42–45 or 42
Severity: High / Medium / Low
Issue: Brief description of the problem
Why This Severity: Explain impact or potential harm
Suggestion: Recommend a specific fix or approach

🧮 Severity Guidelines

HIGH — Must fix before release: crashes, regressions, data loss, security flaws, memory/race bugs
MEDIUM — Should fix soon: architectural drift, test gaps, performance concerns
LOW — Optional fix: style, naming, minor smells, doc improvements

✅ Final Review Summary

Emoji-prefixed scores for each applicable section
Overall quality rating: 1–10
Blockers listed with severity
Summary of feedback and top action items

Output Example

## 📊 Overall Rating: 8.5/10 🟢

### Brief Summary
The implementation successfully addresses screen dismissal and email verification feedback issues by introducing a robust toast notification system and improving authentication flow UX. The code demonstrates solid architecture with proper error handling, animation, and lifecycle management.

---

## 🔍 Detailed Review by Category

#### 1. 🎯 Functionality - Score: 8/10 ✅
✅ Strengths:
- Successfully addresses the core issue: signup modal not dismissing and lack of email verification feedback
- Proper conditional behavior: only dismiss modal on success, stay on screen for errors  
- Toast implementation provides clear user feedback for email verification  
- Router navigation correctly integrated with existing auth flow  

⚠️ Areas for Improvement:
- File: `app/(app)/sign-up.tsx`
- Line: `69-71` 
- Severity: Medium
- Issue: Hardcoded 300ms timeout for toast display  
- Why This Severity: Could create race conditions or timing issues on slower devices  
- Suggestion: Use navigation state listener or Promise.resolve().then() for more reliable timing

---

#### 2. 📖 Readability - Score: 8/10 ✅
✅ Strengths:
- Clear, descriptive comments explaining modal dismissal behavior  
- Consistent import organization and naming conventions  
- Well-structured toast provider with clear interface  
- Good separation of concerns in toast component and context  

⚠️ Areas for Improvement:
- File: `components/ui/toast.tsx`
- Line: `52-60` 
- Severity: Low
- Issue: Switch statement could benefit from a color mapping object  
- Why This Severity: Minor maintainability improvement, doesn't affect functionality  
- Suggestion: Extract color mapping to constants for easier maintenance

---

#### 3. 🔄 Consistency - Score: 6/10 🟡
⚠️ Issues Identified:

- File: `app/(app)/sign-in.tsx`
- Line: `45` 
- Severity: Medium
- Issue: Sign-in doesn't provide user feedback like sign-up does  
- Why This Severity: Inconsistent user experience between auth flows  
- Suggestion: Add toast notification for successful sign-in or error feedback

- File: `app/(app)/welcome.tsx`
- Line: `16` 
- Severity: Medium
- Issue: ToastContainer only added to welcome screen, not consistently across app  
- Why This Severity: Limits toast functionality to single screen, breaks expected behavior  
- Suggestion: Consider adding ToastContainer to main layout or implement global toast positioning

---

[Contininue with the rest of the categories]

iamhenry/Hybrid Code Review Tool.md