Back to the Playbook
Build & VerificationBV-01
How to review a code change
Review actual change scope and system effects, separating substantiated issues from optional preferences.
Product statusAvailable now
Input3 required inputsFull assigned diff at the exact revision · Intended behaviour and acceptance criteria · Initiative focus and approved Product Brain guidance
SkillsReview implementation against the ticket · Prepare task context · Review an artifact against agreed criteriaEngineer + Software Engineer Agent
OutcomeReview verdict per acceptance criterion with the code that satisfies it, required fixes separated from preferences, and the checks not performed.Result only
Owner
Engineer
Human + Agent
Participants · Agents
QAProduct ManagerSoftware Engineer Agent
Trigger
A code change at an identified revision is ready for review against its intended behaviour.
Required context
CodeFull assigned diff at the exact revisionJiraIntended behaviour and acceptance criteriaProduct BrainInitiative focus and approved Product Brain guidance
Optional context
ArchitectureRelevant design and ADRsFilesTest evidence and coding conventions
Skills
Review implementation against the ticketPrepare task contextReview an artifact against agreed criteria
Suggested conversation arc
- 1Establish review scope and revisionIdentify the exact revision, full assigned diff and expected behaviour; expose unavailable context or specialist review needs.Skills: Prepare task context
- 2Analyse design and code behaviourExamine assigned changes in context, including edge cases, complexity, tests, naming and documentation. Link each finding to specific evidence and avoid treating speculation as a defect.Skills: Review implementation against the ticket
- 3Verify relevant behaviourInspect or obtain demonstrations and appropriate test results for changed behaviour, especially UI or concurrency-sensitive flows. Record exact revision and any checks not performed.
- 4Confirm the review outcomeReconcile findings with verification, separate required fixes from preferences and review relevant changed revisions before approval. Retain earlier comments as history.Skills: Review an artifact against agreed criteria
Output
Review verdict per acceptance criterion with the code that satisfies it, required fixes separated from preferences, and the checks not performed.
Artifacts
Result only
What good looks like
- Every finding is linked to specific evidence in the diff.
- A met criterion names the files and symbols that satisfy it.
- Required fixes and optional preferences are kept apart.
- Unverifiable behaviour is named, with what would verify it.
Quality gate
The reviewing engineer approves or requests changes; agent findings never count as approval.
Destination
GitHubJira
Usually next
People and agents work from the same Product Brain. The owner stays accountable. Assigned agents prepare and check. A named person approves at the gate.
Deep dives from the AI PM Lab
Articles that explain the thinking behind this Activity.
Choose the path that matches your role.
Set the Product AI direction with us, or test the shared Product Brain on real work with Jira and code.