Every Requirement Gets a Verdict. I Had Been Reviewing Without One.

Short summary

Code review should map requirements to evidence-based verdicts (covered, partial, missing) instead of vague approval. The author introduces pass/pass-with-risk/hold decisions that surface requirement gaps and timing changes before testing—using a notification queue example where queue behavior changed without updating the requirement. A downloadable review template enables teams to enforce structured verification.

• •Replace 'looks good to me' with three explicit verdicts: covered, partial, or missing for each requirement
• •Use pass/pass-with-risk/hold recommendations to surface uncertainty instead of binary approve/reject
• •Reusable review framework reveals hidden requirement changes (like queue timing) that traditional review misses

Generated with AI, which can make mistakes.