Code review checklist documented
Why it matters
Without a PR template or documented code review checklist, review quality is entirely reviewer-dependent — type safety checks, test coverage verification, and breaking change documentation happen only when a reviewer happens to think of them. ISO 25010:2011 §6.5.3 classifies undocumented review processes as a maintainability defect. PR templates enforce a minimum bar on every PR: the author must explicitly confirm that tests pass, lint is clean, and breaking changes are documented — reducing the rate of issues that slip through to main.
Severity rationale
Info because absent PR templates do not break functionality but allow preventable defects to ship through code review gaps that a checklist would have caught.
Remediation
Add a pull request template at .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md. It pre-populates every new PR description with the checklist, so authors must actively uncheck items rather than passively forgetting them.
<!-- .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md -->
## Summary
Brief description of the change and why it was made.
## Type of Change
- [ ] Bug fix
- [ ] New feature
- [ ] Refactor
- [ ] Documentation
## Checklist
- [ ] No new TypeScript errors (`npm run build` passes)
- [ ] Tests added or updated for changed logic
- [ ] `npm run lint` passes with no warnings
- [ ] No `console.log` or `@ts-ignore` added without comment
- [ ] Breaking changes documented in PR description
Detection
-
ID:
code-review-checklist -
Severity:
info -
What to look for: Check for
.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.mdor.github/pull_request_template.md— this file pre-populates the PR description with a checklist when a new pull request is created. Also check fordocs/CODE_REVIEW.md,CONTRIBUTING.md(which may include a review section), or any documented review standards. A PR template typically includes: type safety checklist, test coverage confirmation, documentation update check, and deployment considerations. Without a template, code review quality depends entirely on the reviewer's discipline. -
Pass criteria: Enumerate all relevant code locations. A pull request template or documented code review checklist exists.
-
Fail criteria: No PR template and no documented review standards.
-
Skip (N/A) when: Solo project where pull requests are not used (single developer, direct commits to main). Still good practice, but genuinely not applicable.
-
Detail on fail:
"No pull request template or code review checklist found in .github/ or docs/" -
Remediation: Add a pull request template:
<!-- .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md --> ## Summary Brief description of the change and why it was made. ## Type of Change - [ ] Bug fix - [ ] New feature - [ ] Refactor - [ ] Documentation ## Checklist - [ ] No new TypeScript errors (`npm run build` passes) - [ ] Tests added or updated for changed logic - [ ] `npm run lint` passes with no warnings - [ ] No `console.log` or `@ts-ignore` added without comment - [ ] Breaking changes documented in PR description
External references
- iso-25010:2011 · maintainability.modifiability — Maintainability — Changeability
Taxons
History
- 2026-04-18·v1.0.0·Initial import from code-quality-essentials·automated