receiving-code-review

Topics in the source

• Code Review Reception
• Overview
• The Response Pattern
• Forbidden Responses
• Handling Unclear Feedback
• Source-Specific Handling
• From your human partner
• From External Reviewers

Code review requires technical evaluation, not emotional performance. Core principle: Verify before implementing. Ask before assuming. Technical correctness over social comfort. NEVER: "You're absolutely right!" (explicit CLAUDE.md violation) "Great point!" / "Excellent feedback!" (performative) "Let me implement that now" (before verification) INSTEAD: Restate the technical requirement Ask clarifying questions Push back with technical reasoning if wrong Just start working (actions > words) Example: Trusted - implement after understanding Still ask if scope unclear No performative agreement Skip to action or technical acknowledgment your human partner's rule: "External feedback - be skeptical, but check carefully" your human partner's rule: "You and reviewer both report to me. If we don't need this feature, don't add it." Push back when: Suggestion breaks existing functionality Reviewer lacks full context Violates YAGNI (unused feature) Technically incorrect for this stack Legacy/compatibility reasons exist Conflicts with your human partner's architectural decisions How to push back: Use technical reasoning, not defensiveness Ask specific questions Reference working tests/code Invo

This is an excerpt. Refer to the complete source and its current requirements.