Skip to content
All Skills

Code Review

Perform code reviews following Sentry engineering practices. Use when reviewing pull requests, examining code changes, or providing feedback on code quality. Covers security, performance, testing, and design review.

Software Engineering|v1|Updated 7/14/2026|GitHub source
MCP get_skill({ skillId: "sentry-code-review-84847bf1" })

Use this skill with your agent

Create a free account and connect via MCP

Get Started Free
# Sentry Code Review

Follow these guidelines when reviewing code for Sentry projects.

## Review Checklist

### Identifying Problems

Look for these issues in code changes:

- **Runtime errors**: Potential exceptions, null pointer issues, out-of-bounds access
- **Performance**: Unbounded O(n²) operations, N+1 queries, unnecessary allocations
- **Side effects**: Unintended behavioral changes affecting other components
- **Backwards compatibility**: Breaking API changes without migration path
- **ORM queries**: Complex Django ORM with unexpected query performance
- **Security vulnerabilities**: Injection, XSS, access control gaps, secrets exposure

### Design Assessment

- Do component interactions make logical sense?
- Does the change align with existing project architecture?
- Are there conflicts with current requirements or goals?

### Test Coverage

Every PR should have appropriate test coverage:

- Functional tests for business logic
- Integration tests for component interactions
- End-to-end tests for critical user paths

Verify tests cover actual requirements and edge cases. Avoid excessive branching or looping in test code.

### Long-Term Impact

Flag for senior engineer review when changes involve:

- Database schema modifications
- API contract changes
- New framework or library adoption
- Performance-critical code paths
- Security-sensitive functionality

## Feedback Guidelines

### Tone

- Be polite and empathetic
- Provide actionable suggestions, not vague criticism
- Phrase as questions when uncertain: "Have you considered...?"

### Approval

- Approve when only minor issues remain
- Don't block PRs for stylistic preferences
- Remember: the goal is risk reduction, not perfect code

## Common Patterns to Flag

### Python/Django

```python
# Bad: N+1 query
for user in users:
    print(user.profile.name)  # Separate query per user

# Good: Prefetch related
users = User.objects.prefetch_related('profile')
```

### TypeScript/React

```typescript
// Bad: Missing dependency in useEffect
useEffect(() => {
  fetchData(userId);
}, []);  // userId not in deps

// Good: Include all dependencies
useEffect(() => {
  fetchData(userId);
}, [userId]);
```

### Security

```python
# Bad: SQL injection risk
cursor.execute(f"SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = {user_id}")

# Good: Parameterized query
cursor.execute("SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = %s", [user_id])
```

## References

- [Sentry Code Review Guidelines](https://develop.sentry.dev/engineering-practices/code-review/)
#observability#sentry#code#review

Related Skills

More skills in Software Engineering

Accessibility Standards

Comprehensive web accessibility standards based on WCAG 2.2 AA, with 38+ anti-patterns, legal enforcement context (EAA, ADA Title II), WAI-ARIA patterns, and framework-specific fixes for modern web frameworks and libraries.

#github-copilot#accessibilityMIT

Accord

Authoring unified specification packages across Business/Development/Design teams via staged elaboration (L0 Vision → L1 Requirements → L2 Team Detail → L3 Acceptance Criteria). No code. Use when authoring cross-team specs, building L0-L3 packages, or aligning Biz/Dev/Design on a single source of truth.

#broad-capability#developmentMIT

Acquire Codebase Knowledge

Use this skill when the user explicitly asks to map, document, or onboard into an existing codebase. Trigger for prompts like "map this codebase", "document this architecture", "onboard me to this repo", or "create codebase docs". Do not trigger for routine feature implementation, bug fixes, or narrow code edits unless the user asks for repository-level discovery.

#github-copilot#documentationMIT

Acreadiness Assess

Run the AgentRC readiness assessment on the current repository and produce a static HTML dashboard at reports/index.html. Wraps `npx github:microsoft/agentrc readiness` and hands off rendering to the @ai-readiness-reporter custom agent. Supports policies (--policy) for org-specific scoring. Use when asked to assess, audit, or score the AI readiness of a repo.

#github-copilot#planningMIT

Acreadiness Generate Instructions

Generate tailored AI agent instruction files via AgentRC instructions command. Produces .github/copilot-instructions.md (default, recommended for Copilot in VS Code) plus optional per-area .instructions.md files with applyTo globs for monorepos. Use after running /acreadiness-assess to close gaps in the AI Tooling pillar.

#github-copilot#skillMIT

Acreadiness Policy

Help the user pick, write, or apply an AgentRC policy. Policies customise readiness scoring by disabling irrelevant checks, overriding impact/level, setting pass-rate thresholds, or chaining org baselines with team overrides. Use when the user asks about strict mode, AI-only scoring, custom weights, CI gating, or wants org-wide standardisation.

#github-copilot#planningMIT

Explore Other Categories

Skills from other categories with shared topics