Code Review — choose the correct review path

Routing page for code review workflows. Choose architecture & boundaries or implementation vs official guidance.

Choose the correct code review path

Use this page when the task is clearly code review, but you still need to choose whether the dominant problem is system structure or implementation correctness against official guidance.

Routing rule

Do not start with a generic all-purpose code-review prompt. Choose the dominant review type first, then run the matching procedure.

System structure
Choose Architecture & Boundaries
Use this when the main question is: “Is the system structure correct?”
This path is for structural diagnosis, ownership, and boundary correctness.
Implementation correctness
Choose Implementation vs Official Guidance
Use this when the main question is: “Is this implementation correct according to official guidance?”
This path is for framework, runtime, API, and source-backed implementation checks.
When both are needed
Run them separately and in order
If both review types are needed, do not merge them into one run.
Order: 1) Code Review: Architecture & Boundaries → 2) Code Review: Implementation vs Official Guidance.

Choose the exact review path

Each option maps to one runnable procedure, one policy boundary, and the matching prompt files.

Option 1
Code Review: Architecture & Boundaries
Choose this when the main question is about system structure, module or layer boundaries, dependency direction, ownership, interface misuse, state leakage, or minimal structural remediation.
Use this path when the dominant problem is architectural shape rather than standards-backed implementation correctness.
Option 2
Code Review: Implementation vs Official Guidance
Choose this when the main question is about whether code or config changes are correct, framework, library, runtime, or platform guidance, API misuse, version-sensitive implementation issues, or source-backed remediation.
Use this path when the dominant problem is implementation correctness against official guidance.

Common mistakes

These are the most common routing failures for this page.

Wrong starting path
Starting with implementation guidance when the real problem is structural.
This usually hides the actual boundary failure.
Using architecture review as style review
Treating architecture review as if it were code-style or framework-guidance review.
The architecture path is about boundaries, ownership, and structural shape.
Merged review contract
Mixing both review types into one run by default.
Run them separately unless there is a deliberate two-pass workflow.
Looking for a mega-prompt
Looking for a single mega-prompt called “code review” instead of choosing the correct path first.
This page is for routing, not for one-size-fits-all execution.