Review changes¶

Choose a pass by the question you need answered. The exact accepted flags vary by command; the CLI reference is the command contract.

Choose a pass¶

Review the change you are about to commit¶

nitpick review examines uncommitted changes by default, or a range with -base and -head. It prints locally and can publish when supplied pull-request flags and GitHub credentials.

Get a quick first pass¶

nitpick fast-review examines eligible changed diffs and ranks at most ten findings. It prints locally and can publish when supplied pull-request flags and GitHub credentials.

Assess a repository or focused directory¶

nitpick full-review [paths...] inspects the whole tree by default, or the paths you name, and writes the broader assessment and remediation plan. It prints locally.

nitpick repo-score [paths...] runs the same wider assessment and adds a scorecard for comparing the same repository over time. It prints locally.

Ask for improvement feedback on a pull request¶

@open-nitpick improve reviews naming, documentation, structure, idiom, and slop after the normal review. It replies on GitHub and does not block a merge.

Normal review¶

Run a normal review from a repository with uncommitted changes:

nitpick review -dry-run

Add -base main -head HEAD when you want an explicit range. -dry-run keeps a GitHub-capable review from publishing. The result includes a walkthrough, findings, coverage, and incomplete stages when planned work did not finish. Do not read zero findings as an approval until completion is true.

Fast review¶

nitpick fast-review -dry-run

Fast review examines eligible changed diffs and returns the ten highest-ranked findings. Use it for an early signal; use a normal review when the merge workflow needs its full configured assessment. -full bypasses incremental narrowing for this run.

Whole-tree review and score¶

nitpick full-review ./internal ./cmd
nitpick repo-score

The full pass reviews every eligible file in the named paths, or the repository when paths are omitted. It can be expensive because it includes model work over the selected tree. repo-score adds a scorecard; use it for comparing the same repository over time, not as a judgment of a project.

Ask for improvement feedback on a pull request¶

On a pull request, mention the reviewer in a conversation comment or inline thread:

@open-nitpick improve

It reviews naming, documentation, structure, idiom, and slop. An inline request covers that file; a conversation request covers the change. It replies with a single comment and does not create findings that block a merge.

Incremental reviews¶

A GitHub review can reuse completed model work when its code, context, model, and policy still match. New commits rerun affected work; unresolved commented files are rechecked so their threads can be confirmed or closed. Use nitpick review -full or @open-nitpick restart-review to inspect the whole change again. CI incremental review explains the stored progress and fallbacks.