jurislm · terry90918 · May 30, 2026 · May 27, 2026 · May 27, 2026 · May 27, 2026
diff --git a/agents/database-reviewer.md b/agents/database-reviewer.md
@@ -1,9 +1,9 @@
 ---
 name: database-reviewer
 description: Use this agent when reviewing PostgreSQL database code for query optimization, schema design, security, or performance, incorporating Supabase best practices. Typical triggers include SQL queries that need an index and table-scan check, schema designs that need a data-type and constraint review, migrations that need a safety review, and database performance troubleshooting. Use PROACTIVELY when writing SQL, creating migrations, designing schemas, or troubleshooting database performance. See "When to invoke" in the agent body for worked scenarios.
-tools: [Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Grep, Glob]
+tools: [Read, Grep, Glob, Bash]
 model: sonnet
-color: yellow
+color: blue
 ---
 
 ## When to invoke

diff --git a/commands/code-review.md b/commands/code-review.md
@@ -49,21 +49,21 @@ add_agent() { case "$SPECIALIST_AGENTS" in *"$1"*) ;; *) SPECIALIST_AGENTS="${SP
 while IFS= read -r file; do
   [ -z "$file" ] && continue
   case "$file" in
-    *.ts|*.tsx|*.js|*.jsx|*.mjs|*.cjs|*.vue|*.svelte) add_agent typescript-reviewer ;;
-    *.py)            add_agent python-reviewer ;;
-    *.go)            add_agent go-reviewer ;;
-    *.rs)            add_agent rust-reviewer ;;
-    *.kt|*.kts)      add_agent kotlin-reviewer ;;
-    *.swift)         add_agent swift-reviewer ;;
-    *.java)          add_agent java-reviewer ;;
-    *.cs)            add_agent csharp-reviewer ;;
-    *.cpp|*.cc|*.cxx|*.c|*.h|*.hpp|*.hxx) add_agent cpp-reviewer ;;
-    *.fs|*.fsx)      add_agent fsharp-reviewer ;;
-    *.dart)          add_agent flutter-reviewer ;;
-    *.sql)           add_agent database-reviewer ;;
+    *.ts|*.tsx|*.js|*.jsx|*.mjs|*.cjs|*.vue|*.svelte) add_agent code-review:typescript-reviewer ;;
+    *.py)            add_agent code-review:python-reviewer ;;
+    *.go)            add_agent code-review:go-reviewer ;;
+    *.rs)            add_agent code-review:rust-reviewer ;;
+    *.kt|*.kts)      add_agent code-review:kotlin-reviewer ;;
+    *.swift)         add_agent code-review:swift-reviewer ;;
+    *.java)          add_agent code-review:java-reviewer ;;
+    *.cs)            add_agent code-review:csharp-reviewer ;;
+    *.cpp|*.cc|*.cxx|*.c|*.h|*.hpp|*.hxx) add_agent code-review:cpp-reviewer ;;
+    *.fs|*.fsx)      add_agent code-review:fsharp-reviewer ;;
+    *.dart)          add_agent code-review:flutter-reviewer ;;
+    *.sql)           add_agent code-review:database-reviewer ;;
   esac
-  # Migration files (framework-agnostic naming) → database-reviewer
-  case "$file" in *migrations/*|*migrate/*) add_agent database-reviewer ;; esac
+  # Migration files (framework-agnostic naming) → code-review:database-reviewer
+  case "$file" in *migrations/*|*migrate/*) add_agent code-review:database-reviewer ;; esac
 done <<< "$CHANGED_FILES"
 ```
 
@@ -73,17 +73,17 @@ After the extension pass, inspect file content to add framework specialists. Onl
 
 | Framework | Signal (in changed files) | Add agent |
 |---|---|---|
-| **Django** | `from django`, `models.Model`, `manage.py`, `settings.py`, `urls.py` | `django-reviewer` |
-| **FastAPI** | `from fastapi`, `APIRouter`, `@app.get`/`@router.` | `fastapi-reviewer` |
-| **Flutter** | `pubspec.yaml` present + any `.dart` file, or `package:flutter` import | `flutter-reviewer` |
-| **Database / Supabase** | `.sql`, migration dirs, `CREATE TABLE`, `supabase` client usage | `database-reviewer` |
+| **Django** | `from django`, `models.Model`, `manage.py`, `settings.py`, `urls.py` | `code-review:django-reviewer` |
+| **FastAPI** | `from fastapi`, `APIRouter`, `@app.get`/`@router.` | `code-review:fastapi-reviewer` |
+| **Flutter** | `pubspec.yaml` present + any `.dart` file, or `package:flutter` import | `code-review:flutter-reviewer` |
+| **Database / Supabase** | `.sql`, migration dirs, `CREATE TABLE`, `supabase` client usage | `code-review:database-reviewer` |
 
 Two domains are **content-only** (no reliable extension) — add when context makes them relevant, otherwise skip:
-- **`network-config-reviewer`** — router/switch configs (Cisco IOS `interface`/`access-list`, JunOS), `.cfg`/`.conf` device configs
-- **`healthcare-reviewer`** (Opus) — PHI/HIPAA, EMR/EHR, clinical decision support code
-- **`mle-reviewer`** — ML training/serving, feature pipelines, `torch`/`sklearn`/model-serving code
+- **`code-review:network-config-reviewer`** — router/switch configs (Cisco IOS `interface`/`access-list`, JunOS), `.cfg`/`.conf` device configs
+- **`code-review:healthcare-reviewer`** (Opus) — PHI/HIPAA, EMR/EHR, clinical decision support code
+- **`code-review:mle-reviewer`** — ML training/serving, feature pipelines, `torch`/`sklearn`/model-serving code
 
-> Framework agents **supplement**, not replace, the language agent (e.g. a Django change runs both `python-reviewer` and `django-reviewer`).
+> Framework agents **supplement**, not replace, the language agent (e.g. a Django change runs both `code-review:python-reviewer` and `code-review:django-reviewer`).
 
 `$SPECIALIST_AGENTS` (deduplicated) is now the set of language/framework agents to add to the review.
 
@@ -111,19 +111,19 @@ Set `CHANGED_FILES` from the output above.
 
 ### Phase 1.5 — CLASSIFY & DISPATCH
 
-Run the same file classification as GitHub PR mode Phase 1.5 (populate `$LOGIC_FILES` / `$SECURITY_FILES`), then run **Language / Framework Auto-Dispatch** (above) to compute `$SPECIALIST_AGENTS`. Announce what was detected, e.g. `Detected: python-reviewer, django-reviewer`. The Fast Path (docs/config only → secret scan only) applies here too.
+Run the same file classification as GitHub PR mode Phase 1.5 (populate `$LOGIC_FILES` / `$SECURITY_FILES`), then run **Language / Framework Auto-Dispatch** (above) to compute `$SPECIALIST_AGENTS`. Announce what was detected, e.g. `Detected: code-review:python-reviewer, code-review:django-reviewer`. The Fast Path (docs/config only → secret scan only) applies here too.
 
 ### Phase 2 — CONTEXT & CODE GRAPH
 
-Run GitHub PR mode Phases 2 and 2.5 against the working tree: load project rules and `.claude/review-paths.yaml`, trace callers, run static analysis (capture as context), and run `code-graph-analyzer` (cache key `local-<sha8>` from `git rev-parse --short=8 HEAD`). Store the result as `IMPACT_MAP`.
+Run GitHub PR mode Phases 2 and 2.5 against the working tree: load project rules and `.claude/review-paths.yaml`, trace callers, run static analysis (capture as context), and run `code-review:code-graph-analyzer` (cache key `local-<sha8>` from `git rev-parse --short=8 HEAD`). Store the result as `IMPACT_MAP`.
 
 ### Phase 3 — REVIEW (parallel agents)
 
-Run the **full parallel agent pool** exactly as GitHub PR mode Phase 3: the 8 general agents (`code-reviewer` anchor + `security-reviewer` + the six collaborators) **plus** every agent in `$SPECIALIST_AGENTS`, each reading changed files in full from the working tree. `--focus` filtering and the always-on specialists apply identically.
+Run the **full parallel agent pool** exactly as GitHub PR mode Phase 3: the 8 general agents (`code-review:code-reviewer` anchor + `code-review:security-reviewer` + the six collaborators) **plus** every agent in `$SPECIALIST_AGENTS`, each reading changed files in full from the working tree. `--focus` filtering and the always-on specialists apply identically.
 
 ### Phase 3.5 — VERIFICATION PASS
 
-Run `verification-reviewer` over all HIGH/CRITICAL findings, identical to GitHub PR mode Phase 3.5.
+Run `code-review:verification-reviewer` over all HIGH/CRITICAL findings, identical to GitHub PR mode Phase 3.5.
 
 ### Phase 4 — AGGREGATE & REPORT
 
@@ -267,7 +267,7 @@ Build review context:
 
 ### Phase 2.5 — CODE GRAPH
 
-Run `code-graph-analyzer` **sequentially** (wait for the result before Phase 3). Provides cross-file dependency context unavailable from the diff alone.
+Run `code-review:code-graph-analyzer` **sequentially** (wait for the result before Phase 3). Provides cross-file dependency context unavailable from the diff alone.
 
 Pass to the agent:
 - `$LOGIC_FILES` and `$SECURITY_FILES` from Phase 1.5 (excludes DOCS/CONFIG/TEST)
@@ -282,7 +282,7 @@ The agent checks `.claude/code-graph/<cache_key>-impact-map.md` first — return
 [END IMPACT MAP]
 ```
 
-If `code-graph-analyzer` errors or times out, proceed without the impact map — do not block the review.
+If `code-review:code-graph-analyzer` errors or times out, proceed without the impact map — do not block the review.
 
 ### Phase 3 — REVIEW (parallel agents)
 
@@ -295,21 +295,21 @@ gh pr diff <NUMBER> --name-only | while IFS= read -r file; do
 done
 ```
 
-**Agent pool** — `code-reviewer` is always the anchor. The full pool is:
+**Agent pool** — `code-review:code-reviewer` is always the anchor. The full pool is:
 
 **General agents (8):**
-- `code-reviewer` — overall quality, security, maintainability (anchor)
-- `security-reviewer` — OWASP Top 10; injection, SSRF, hardcoded secrets, unsafe crypto
-- `comment-analyzer` — inline comment accuracy, completeness, rot risk
-- `pr-test-analyzer` — test coverage, behavioral coverage, real-bug prevention
-- `silent-failure-hunter` — swallowed errors, ignored promises, missing propagation
-- `type-design-analyzer` — type encapsulation, invariant expression, enforcement
-- `code-simplifier` — over-complex implementations, duplicate abstractions
-- `pr-walkthrough-writer` — structured walkthrough + Mermaid diagram (skip when `--focus` is set); **store output as `WALKTHROUGH_OUTPUT`**
+- `code-review:code-reviewer` — overall quality, security, maintainability (anchor)
+- `code-review:security-reviewer` — OWASP Top 10; injection, SSRF, hardcoded secrets, unsafe crypto
+- `code-review:comment-analyzer` — inline comment accuracy, completeness, rot risk
+- `code-review:pr-test-analyzer` — test coverage, behavioral coverage, real-bug prevention
+- `code-review:silent-failure-hunter` — swallowed errors, ignored promises, missing propagation
+- `code-review:type-design-analyzer` — type encapsulation, invariant expression, enforcement
+- `code-review:code-simplifier` — over-complex implementations, duplicate abstractions
+- `code-review:pr-walkthrough-writer` — structured walkthrough + Mermaid diagram (skip when `--focus` is set); **store output as `WALKTHROUGH_OUTPUT`**
 
 **Specialist agents (auto-dispatched):** every agent in `$SPECIALIST_AGENTS` (from Phase 1.5) runs alongside the general pool, scoped to its language/framework files.
 
-**`--focus` filtering** — `code-reviewer` always runs. The auto-dispatched `$SPECIALIST_AGENTS` always run (language coverage is independent of focus). When `--focus` is specified, validate it first:
+**`--focus` filtering** — `code-review:code-reviewer` always runs. The auto-dispatched `$SPECIALIST_AGENTS` always run (language coverage is independent of focus). When `--focus` is specified, validate it first:
 
 ```
 Valid --focus values: comments | tests | errors | types | code | simplify
@@ -321,18 +321,18 @@ A valid `--focus` runs only the mapped general subset (plus the always-on specia
 | `--focus` | General agents to run |
 |---|---|
 | _(none)_ | All 8 general agents |
-| `comments` | `code-reviewer` + `comment-analyzer` |
-| `tests` | `code-reviewer` + `pr-test-analyzer` |
-| `errors` | `code-reviewer` + `silent-failure-hunter` |
-| `types` | `code-reviewer` + `type-design-analyzer` |
-| `code` | `code-reviewer` + `security-reviewer` |
-| `simplify` | `code-reviewer` + `code-simplifier` |
+| `comments` | `code-review:code-reviewer` + `code-review:comment-analyzer` |
+| `tests` | `code-review:code-reviewer` + `code-review:pr-test-analyzer` |
+| `errors` | `code-review:code-reviewer` + `code-review:silent-failure-hunter` |
+| `types` | `code-review:code-reviewer` + `code-review:type-design-analyzer` |
+| `code` | `code-review:code-reviewer` + `code-review:security-reviewer` |
+| `simplify` | `code-review:code-reviewer` + `code-review:code-simplifier` |
 
 Apply the 7-category **Review Checklist** (below) across all agents.
 
 ### Phase 3.5 — VERIFICATION PASS
 
-Launch `verification-reviewer` with all HIGH and CRITICAL findings from Phase 3. Wait for its output. Carry forward:
+Launch `code-review:verification-reviewer` with all HIGH and CRITICAL findings from Phase 3. Wait for its output. Carry forward:
 - All **CONFIRMED** findings at their original or verified severity.
 - **UNCERTAIN** findings demoted to MEDIUM (survive as MEDIUM — do not discard).
 - All **CRITICAL** findings regardless of verdict — may be demoted to HIGH, never removed.
@@ -467,7 +467,7 @@ printf '%s\n\n%s' "$STRIPPED" "$SUMMARY_BLOCK" | gh pr edit <NUMBER> --body-file
 
 **Step 7a — Walkthrough comment first** — the first thing developers see, posted before any findings.
 
-Use `WALKTHROUGH_OUTPUT` from `pr-walkthrough-writer` if it ran; otherwise generate inline. Include a 1–5 **Review Effort** score:
+Use `WALKTHROUGH_OUTPUT` from `code-review:pr-walkthrough-writer` if it ran; otherwise generate inline. Include a 1–5 **Review Effort** score:
 - **1** Docs/config/formatting only · **2** Small fix, 1–3 files · **3** Medium feature/refactor, 4–10 files · **4** Complex refactor or >10 files · **5** Architecture/schema/auth/cross-cutting
 
 Add a Mermaid sequence diagram only when ≤10 files changed AND at least one non-test logic file is present and a clear multi-layer flow exists; otherwise omit.
@@ -640,7 +640,7 @@ Identical to GitHub mode. Read each changed file in full at the PR head commit:
 curl -s -u "$BB_USERNAME:$BB_APP_PASSWORD" \
   "https://api.bitbucket.org/2.0/repositories/{workspace}/{slug}/src/{head_commit}/{filepath}"
 ```
-Run the full parallel agent pool (general + `$SPECIALIST_AGENTS`), `verification-reviewer` (Phase 3.5), and the same aggregate/validate/decide logic.
+Run the full parallel agent pool (general + `$SPECIALIST_AGENTS`), `code-review:verification-reviewer` (Phase 3.5), and the same aggregate/validate/decide logic.
 
 ### Phase 6 — REPORT ARTIFACT