Define Your Code Review Standards

Help me document my code review standards by interviewing me. Ask one question at a time. 1. **Auto-reject triggers** — What makes you reject a PR without reading further? (e.g., no tests, 500+ line diff, force-push to main) 2. **Quality bar** — Show me a PR you approved quickly and one you sent back 3+ times. What was the difference? 3. **Naming standards** — What naming patterns do you enforce? What names make you rewrite the whole thing? 4. **Test expectations** — What's the minimum test coverage you accept? Unit only, or integration too? 5. **Security checklist** — What security patterns do you always check for? 6. **What you let slide** — What do you notice but choose not to comment on? Why? Rules: - If I say "it depends" — ask me for the two most common cases. - For each standard, ask: "Would you block a release over this?" - Output a review checklist I can share with my team and use in CI.