> ## Documentation Index
> Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://docs.orkestral.pro/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

# Code review

> Senior-level reviews on your GitHub PRs, with the verdict in chat.

The **Code Reviewer** agent reads your pull requests like a senior engineer. It returns structured findings, leaves inline comments on the exact lines, and reports a clear verdict back to your chat, so nothing is ever marked "done but unverified".

## How it works

<CardGroup cols={2}>
  <Card title="Triggered automatically" icon="bolt">
    When a specialist finishes a code change, the orchestrator hands it to the Code Reviewer before reporting back.
  </Card>

  <Card title="Reviews real PRs" icon="code-branch">
    The agent reviews the GitHub pull request, the same diff your teammates would see.
  </Card>

  <Card title="Structured findings" icon="list-check">
    Each issue is categorized and tied to a file and line, with inline comments on the PR.
  </Card>

  <Card title="Verdict in chat" icon="comments">
    Approved or changes requested flows back to your chat, closing the loop.
  </Card>
</CardGroup>

## Triggering a review

A review starts in one of two ways.

<Steps>
  <Step title="As part of a delegated task">
    When you ask the team to build or fix something, the orchestrator routes the resulting code change to the Code Reviewer as a validation step. You don't have to ask for it, review is built into how work is delivered.
  </Step>

  <Step title="On demand">
    Point the team at an existing pull request and ask for a review. The Code Reviewer pulls the PR and evaluates it directly.
  </Step>
</Steps>

<Note>
  Review is the verification step that turns a code change into trusted work. The agent validates the change before the orchestrator tells you it's complete.
</Note>

## Reviewing GitHub PRs

The Code Reviewer works against the pull request itself, title, description, and the full diff across changed files.

<AccordionGroup>
  <Accordion title="Reads the full diff" icon="folder-tree">
    The agent loads every changed file in the PR and reviews additions, deletions, and context, not just the lines that changed in isolation.
  </Accordion>

  <Accordion title="Reviews against the repo" icon="magnifying-glass">
    Because the team has full context on your repository, findings reflect your actual conventions and surrounding code, not generic advice.
  </Accordion>

  <Accordion title="Senior-level lens" icon="brain">
    Correctness, edge cases, security, readability, and maintainability, the things a senior reviewer flags before approving.
  </Accordion>
</AccordionGroup>

## Structured findings and inline comments

The review is not a wall of prose. Each finding is structured and placed where it matters.

<CardGroup cols={2}>
  <Card title="Categorized findings" icon="bullseye">
    Every finding has a category and severity, so you can tell a blocking bug from a nice-to-have at a glance.
  </Card>

  <Card title="Inline comments" icon="code-branch">
    Comments land on the exact file and line in the PR, next to the code they're about.
  </Card>
</CardGroup>

<Tip>
  Inline comments keep the conversation anchored to the code. You can resolve them in GitHub like any other review thread.
</Tip>

## The verdict flows back to chat

When the review finishes, its conclusion returns to the chat where the work began.

<Tabs>
  <Tab title="Approved">
    The change passed review. The orchestrator reports it back as verified, and the loop is closed, the work is genuinely done.
  </Tab>

  <Tab title="Changes requested">
    The Code Reviewer found issues worth fixing. The verdict and findings return to chat, and the team can act on them, sending the change back to a specialist for revision.
  </Tab>
</Tabs>

<Warning>
  A change requested verdict means the work is **not** done yet. Orkestral surfaces this in chat so a flawed change never silently passes as complete.
</Warning>

## Where this fits

Code review is the closing step of the team workflow: a specialist makes the change, the Code Reviewer validates it, and the verdict comes home to chat.

<CardGroup cols={2}>
  <Card title="Meet the team" icon="users" href="/en/agents">
    See every specialist and how the reporting hierarchy works.
  </Card>

  <Card title="Issues & epics" icon="list-check" href="/en/issues">
    How the team turns a request into a reviewable pull request.
  </Card>
</CardGroup>