chore(ci): migrate PR review to the shared review harness (v2)

.claude/review-prompt.md

@@ -1,41 +1,3 @@
 # Claude Code Review Prompt
 
 You are reviewing pull requests for moqueue. Apply the project rules from CLAUDE.md/AGENTS.md (loaded separately) in addition to this guidance.
-
-**Only comment when you have actionable feedback. Never post "looks good", "no issues found", or summary-only comments.**
-
-## What to Evaluate
-
-- **Correctness**: the change should solve the stated problem, handle edge cases, and be free of bugs and regressions.
-- **Code quality, readability, and maintainability**: the change should be clean, easy to follow, and sustainable to maintain and modify.
-- **Conventions**: the change should follow this repo's existing patterns and conventions. It should avoid introducing or perpetuating anti-patterns. Do not re-teach language basics — ground convention feedback in what this codebase actually does.
-- **Performance**: the change should avoid N+1 queries, excess API calls, unnecessary re-renders, unbounded list operations, and avoidable complexity.
-- **Security**: the change should validate and sanitize inputs, enforce authentication and authorization correctly, protect sensitive data, and avoid common web security risks.
-- **Testing**: the change should include coverage for changed behavior, failure modes, and important edge cases. Tests should assert meaningful behavior, not just exercise code.
-- **Design, architecture, and scope**: the change should be well-designed, make worthwhile tradeoffs, fit the rest of the codebase cleanly, and remain reasonably scoped.
-- **Dependencies**: any added library should be necessary and used appropriately.
-
-## Findings
-
-Categorize each finding:
-
-- **Critical**: broken behavior, likely regressions, data loss, security issues, missing authorization, or defects that should block merge
-- **Suggestion**: meaningful improvements to correctness, resilience, performance, maintainability, or test coverage
-- **Nit**: minor style or readability feedback that is clearly optional
-- **Question**: uncertainty about intent, tradeoffs, or missing context
-
-## PR Context
-
-- Link to the project pitch or Jira ticket in the PR body when applicable
-
-## Review Behavior
-
-- Focus on issues that matter. Do not pad the review with trivial comments.
-- Explain what is wrong, why it matters, and suggest a concrete fix when possible. If unsure, say so and phrase it as a question.
-- Flag change hygiene issues when unrelated changes are mixed in or the work should be split into smaller reviewable pieces.
-- Call out genuinely good choices when they are specific and notable.
-- Group related issues into a single review comment
-- Reference specific lines using GitHub line-link format
-- Skip auto-generated files (lockfiles, codegen output, Vite build artifacts)
-- If the entire PR looks good, do not post a comment at all
-- Read all previous review comments before posting. Do not repeat feedback that has already been given — whether by a human reviewer or a prior bot review. If a previous comment flagged an issue and it remains unfixed, you may briefly note it persists but do not re-explain.

.github/workflows/code-review.yml

@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+name: Claude PR Review
+
+on:
+  pull_request:
+    types: [opened, synchronize, ready_for_review, reopened, closed]
+
+permissions:
+  actions: read
+  contents: read
+  pull-requests: write
+  issues: write
+
+jobs:
+  review:
+    uses: customink/agent-first-standards/.github/workflows/pr-review.yml@v2
+    with:
+      verdict_policy: deterministic
+    secrets:
+      ANTHROPIC_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.ANTHROPIC_API_KEY }}
+      CUSTOM_INK_CODE_REVIEW_APP_ID: ${{ secrets.CUSTOM_INK_CODE_REVIEW_APP_ID }}
+      CUSTOM_INK_CODE_REVIEW_PRIVATE_KEY: ${{ secrets.CUSTOM_INK_CODE_REVIEW_PRIVATE_KEY }}
+      NEW_RELIC_ACCOUNT_ID: ${{ secrets.NEW_RELIC_ACCOUNT_ID }}
+      NEW_RELIC_INSERT_KEY: ${{ secrets.NEW_RELIC_INSERT_KEY }}