Skip to content

add instructions to review agent for api bar raising #21

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
mehtarac merged 2 commits into from
Feb 5, 2026
+28 −3
Merged

add instructions to review agent for api bar raising #21

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
705212b
add instructions to review agent for api bar raising
mehtarac Feb 5, 2026
9486f1c
updated SOP to link to the docs repo and removed duplicated file
mehtarac Feb 5, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
31 changes: 28 additions & 3 deletions strands-command/agent-sops/task-reviewer.sop.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ Initialize the review environment by checking out the main branch for guidance.
- You MUST checkout the main branch first to read repository review guidance
- You MUST create a progress notebook to track your review process using markdown checklists
- You MUST read repository guidelines from `README.md`, `CONTRIBUTING.md`, and `AGENTS.md` (if present)
- You MUST read API bar raising guidelines from https://github.com/strands-agents/docs/blob/main/team/API_BAR_RAISING.md
- You MUST create a checklist of items to review based on the repository guidelines

### 2. Analyze Pull Request Context
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -51,7 +52,31 @@ Analyze the overall structure and architecture of the changes.
- You MUST identify any potential breaking changes
- You MUST check for proper separation of concerns

#### 3.2 Code Quality Review
#### 3.2 API Bar Raising Review

If the PR introduces or modifies public APIs, evaluate the API design from a customer perspective.

**Constraints:**
- You MUST check if the PR has `needs-api-review` or `completed-api-review` labels
- You MUST verify the PR includes API documentation in the description:
- Expected use cases for the new feature
- Example code snippets demonstrating usage
- Complete API signatures with default parameter values
- Module exports (what's exported from each module)
- You MUST evaluate the API against SDK tenets (https://github.com/strands-agents/docs/blob/main/team/TENETS.md) and decision records (https://github.com/strands-agents/docs/blob/main/team/DECISIONS.md)
- You MUST verify the API addresses documented use cases
- You MUST check if default parameters/behavior represent the most common usage
- You MUST assess the level of abstraction and extensibility:
- What is customizable and what is not?
- Is it the proper level of abstraction?
- You MUST identify use cases that are not addressed and question why
- You MUST flag if the PR requires API review but lacks the `needs-api-review` label for:
- New public classes or abstractions customers will use
- New primitives or frequently-used functionality
- Changes to existing public API contracts
- You MAY suggest the change scope requires designated API reviewer or team consensus if substantial

#### 3.3 Code Quality Review

Examine the code for quality, readability, and maintainability issues.

Expand All @@ -65,7 +90,7 @@ Examine the code for quality, readability, and maintainability issues.
- You MUST check for potential performance issues
- You MUST verify design decisions are documented (why certain patterns were chosen, alternatives considered, tradeoffs made)

#### 3.3 Testing Review
#### 3.4 Testing Review

Analyze the test coverage and quality of tests.

Expand All @@ -77,7 +102,7 @@ Analyze the test coverage and quality of tests.
- You MUST identify missing edge cases or error scenarios
- You MUST verify integration tests are included when appropriate

#### 3.4 Documentation Review
#### 3.5 Documentation Review

Check documentation completeness and quality.

Expand Down