java-code-reviewlisted

# Java Code Review Skill Systematic code review for the `tools` multi-module reactor. Start with the rules this repo *enforces at build time* — an ArchUnit or surefire violation fails the build, not just review — then the defect shapes this repository's own history shows, then the general Java checks. ## Review strategy 1. **Enforced rules** (section 1) — anything there fails the build, so flag it as Critical regardless of how the code otherwise reads. 2. **Defect shapes** (section 2) — the five shapes this repo actually ships fixes for. Highest yield after section 1; a generic checklist misses all five. 3. **General checks** (section 3) — null safety, exceptions, collections, concurrency, idioms, resources, API, performance. 4. **Summary** — findings by severity, with line references. Focus on the changed lines (`git diff`), group similar findings, reference line numbers rather than re-quoting blocks, and skip generated sources (protogen output under `target/`) and fixtures. ```markdown ## Code Review: [file/feature name] ### Critical - [Issue + line reference + suggestion] ### Improvements - [Suggestion + rationale] ### Minor/Style - [Nitpicks, optional improvements] ### Good Practices Observed - [Positive feedback] ``` | Severity | Criteria | |---|---| | **Critical** | Breaks an enforced repo rule, security/data-loss risk, or a likely crash | | **High** | Bug likely, significant perf issue, breaks an API contract | | **Medium** | Code smell, maintainabil