Update REVIEW.md based on recent feedback/PRs#43
Conversation
![claude[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1236702?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Documentation-only update to reviewer guidance; the inline comments flag a couple of typographical nits worth fixing but the PR is otherwise straightforward.
Extended reasoning...
Overview
This PR is a documentation-only change to REVIEW.md, the file that drives reviewer (and AI reviewer) behavior for plugin PRs. The diff adds new guidance bullets (breaking-change folder convention, editor/AI config files, author.type for labs, dashboard ID GUID requirement, several new dataStreams rules, source type naming, README setup ordering, alternate doc filename) and refreshes a couple of existing strings.
Security risks
None. No code, secrets, auth, or runtime behavior is touched. The file is plain Markdown documenting review conventions.
Level of scrutiny
Low. This is a Markdown-only change to a guidance document, additive in nature, with no impact on the plugin platform or any shipped plugin. The bugs surfaced are typographical nits inside the new bullets (curly quotes inside JSON literals on lines 74-75, and unbalanced parens on line 73) — they are worth fixing while the lines are fresh, but they don't change the substantive guidance.
Other factors
The PR is small (single file) and self-contained. The author's description marks it as a refresh based on recent feedback/PRs. The inline comments will surface the typography nits without needing additional review-body restatement, and the substantive content of the new rules looks consistent with patterns already established elsewhere in the file.
🧩 Plugin PR Summaryℹ️ No plugins were modified in this PR. |
1 participant
📋 Summary
Update REVIEW.md based on recent feedback/PRs
🔍 Scope of change
📚 Checklist