feat: review locally with your own agent as the engine - #51
Conversation
`review plan` prints everything a reviewer needs — files in scope with the reasons for exclusions, per-language checklists, the P0-P3 rubric, the output shape, the project's conventions — and `review submit` verifies positions, dedupes, applies the gate and reports, in text, markdown or JSON. Nothing in this path talks to OrcaRouter or needs a key; the thinking is the agent's. - `--pr <n>` reviews a pull request by number without checking it out - `--lang` follows the user's language through the plan, findings and report - file selection is Open Code Review's own rules, vendored as data under vendor/open-code-review (Apache-2.0) with a JS port of its matcher — no `ocr` binary to install - `.orcacode-review.json` holds a repo's block_on / language / exclude / rules; `review config` shows what applies and `review config init` writes it; the plan offers to create it once, after the first review - exit 0 for a review that ran; `--fail-on-block` for hooks that want a 1; 2 for an unusable result is never suppressed Skills are renamed to orca-review and orca-review-action; installing the new names retires our old ones beside them. The installer now asks how you will use it — local, Action, or both — and `--mode` answers that for scripts. rules/output-shape.md shows a wrong/right title pair, because a real PR got a sixteen-word imperative title with a semicolon.
…E that shows each Recorded with vhs against a throwaway repo (docs/tapes/README.md says how). Every prompt takes its recommended answer. The old combined demo is retired; the two features get their own GIF, with the 3x-speed mp4 linked beside each.
![orcacode-review[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/4254738?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🐳 OrcaCode Review
✅ No findings — nothing to flag in this PR. Great work!
OrcaCode Review — Route Smarter. Ship Safer. Spend Less.
Engine-reported: 360 calls · 26.1M tokens · 98% cached
❤️ Share · Install OrcaCode Review
Free on GitHub — the review runs on your own OrcaRouter key. If it helped, a shout-out goes a long way.
Share: X · Reddit · LinkedIn
Follow: X · Discord · LinkedIn · OrcaRouter
Drop the '3x · mp4' captions under the GIFs, and the menus of npx subcommands and flags. The product is the two skills; you tell your agent what to review and it drives the CLI. The one command that stays is the install. Flags and the review contract are documented where a scripter looks, in --help and skills/orca-review/references/contract.md.
package.json, plugin.json and marketplace.json move together, as the publish workflow insists. The tarball check now also names the local-review files — harness, selection, config, the vendored rules, both skills — so a files: regression in package.json fails the release instead of shipping a plan with no rubric.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
⚠️ Outdated review — the PR head changed from 0ed4dea to 44c4fef during the review; these findings describe a diff the PR no longer has.
These findings describe0ed4dea66723. Re-run the review to check the PR as it stands now.
🐳 OrcaCode Review
✅ No findings — nothing to flag in this PR. Great work!
OrcaCode Review — Route Smarter. Ship Safer. Spend Less.
Engine-reported: 321 calls · 22.9M tokens · 98% cached
❤️ Share · Install OrcaCode Review
Free on GitHub — the review runs on your own OrcaRouter key. If it helped, a shout-out goes a long way.
Share: X · Reddit · LinkedIn
Follow: X · Discord · LinkedIn · OrcaRouter
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🐳 OrcaCode Review
Found 1 issue in this PR: 🟠 1 P1.
OrcaCode Review — Route Smarter. Ship Safer. Spend Less.
Engine-reported: 339 calls · 26M tokens · 98% cached
❤️ Share · Install OrcaCode Review
Free on GitHub — the review runs on your own OrcaRouter key. If it helped, a shout-out goes a long way.
Share: X · Reddit · LinkedIn
Follow: X · Discord · LinkedIn · OrcaRouter
| const abs = path.resolve(root, r.rule_file); | ||
| if (!abs.startsWith(`${path.resolve(root)}${path.sep}`)) return fail(`${at} "rule_file" must stay inside the repository`); | ||
| try { | ||
| text = fs.readFileSync(abs, "utf8"); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🟠 P1 Resolve rule_file through realpath before trusting it stays inside the repo
The confinement check for "rule_file" is purely lexical: abs = path.resolve(root, r.rule_file) then a startsWith(root + sep) prefix test, then fs.readFileSync(abs). path.resolve does not resolve symlinks, so a rule_file that names a symlink inside the repo (git tracks symlinks, and a clone reproduces them, absolute targets and all) passes the check while readFileSync follows the link and reads an arbitrary file outside the checkout. Proven with a repo containing .orcacode-review.json {"rules":[{"path":"/*.js","rule_file":"hook.js"}]} where hook.js -> /outside/file: loadLocalConfig returns ok:true with the outside file's content as the rule text. That text is then embedded by buildPlan/ruleGroups into the plan prompt (review plan prints it to stdout; the agent forwards it to the model provider). The comment right above the check states the intent — "a config that points outside the checkout is a config that reads someone else's files into a prompt" — so a malicious or merely unusual repo (branch being locally reviewed, or a fork's tree containing a symlink to a well-known local path such as a credentials file) causes arbitrary local file contents to be read and shipped in the prompt. Fix: compare fs.realpathSync of the resolved file (and, to be safe, realpath of root) instead of the lexical prefix, e.g. const real = fs.realpathSync(abs); if (!real.startsWith(realRoot + path.sep)) fail(...).
1 participant
Orca-Code-Review — push 2
❌ 1 finding blocks merge
What this adds
Local review.
npx @orcarouter/code-review review planprints a complete review request; the user's own coding agent reviews;review submitverifies positions, dedupes, applies the P0-P3 gate, and reports as text, markdown, or JSON. No OrcaRouter account, no API key — the thinking is the agent's.--pr <n>reviews a pull request by number without checking it out.Same file selection as CI, no binary. Open Code Review's exclusion rules and per-language checklists are vendored as data under
vendor/open-code-review/(Apache-2.0, unmodified, with LICENSE and provenance) and read by a JavaScript port of its matcher inbin/selection.mjs.ocris no longer spawned anywhere.Per-repo settings.
.orcacode-review.jsonholdsblock_on,language,exclude,rules.review configshows what applies and where each value came from;review config initwrites the template; the plan offers to create it once, after the first review. An invalid file exits 2 with the offending key named.Language follows the user.
--lang(or the file, or the locale) drives the plan's instructions, the findings, and the report's own strings, in en/zh/ja/ko.Exit codes. A review that ran exits 0; the verdict is in the report.
--fail-on-blockgives hooks and CI a 1. An unusable result exits 2 and is never suppressed.Skills renamed to
orca-reviewandorca-review-action. Installing the new names removes our oldrun-orca-code-review/setup-orca-code-reviewbeside them (only ours — a same-named directory with a differentname:is left alone). The installer now asks how you will use it — local, Action, or both — and--modeanswers that for scripts.Rubric.
rules/output-shape.mdnow shows a wrong/right title pair; a real PR had produced a sixteen-word imperative title with a semicolon.Demos
Three recordings under
docs/, each answered with its recommended option, embedded in the README: install (both modes), Action setup viaorca-review-action, and a local review of a pull request viaorca-reviewthat finds three planted P1s.docs/tapes/has the vhs tapes and how to re-render.Not changed
action.yml,scripts/postfilter.mjs,scripts/severity.mjs,scripts/judge.mjs— the CI path is untouched; the local harness shares the rubric and the position check with it, byte for byte.Tests
536 passing (
npm test), including end-to-end runs of the CLI against scratch repositories.