Use Cases

​

Code Reviews

Scenario: You’ve opened a pull request and want Charlie’s feedback.

1. Automatic Review Trigger:

• Charlie automatically starts reviewing when PRs are marked “Ready for Review”
• He analyzes code changes, looking for:
  • Potential bugs and issues
  • Performance optimizations
  • TypeScript best practices
  • Security concerns
  • Code style and maintainability

2. Manual Review Request:

@CharlieHelps, would you mind reviewing this PR?

After analyzing the changes, he responds:

I’ve reviewed the changes in src/services/user.ts. Here’s what I found:

1. Performance Warning: The processUsers function could be optimized:

   // Current implementation in src/services/user.ts:27
   function processUsers(users: User[]) {
     const result = [];
     for (let i = 0; i < users.length; i++) {
       result.push(transform(users[i]));
     }
     return result;
   }
   

   Consider using Array.map() for better readability and performance:

   function processUsers(users: User[]) {
     return users.map(transform);
   }
   

2. TypeScript Improvement: Consider using type inference here instead of explicit typing
3. Security Note: Remember to validate user input before processing. See our validation patterns in src/utils/validation.ts

Additional Context: We implemented similar optimizations in PR #234 for the customer service. You can find more examples in src/utils/array-helpers.ts.

​

Technical Discussions

Scenario: You want to discuss code, search for documentation, or understand your codebase better.

1. Code Explanations:

@CharlieHelps, could you explain how our error handling system works?

After searching the codebase, he responds:

Let me explain our error handling patterns:

// From src/utils/error-handler.ts
export class APIError extends Error {
  constructor(
    message: string,
    public statusCode: number
  ) {
    super(message);
  }
}

Implementation Details:

• All errors are automatically reported to our error tracking service
• Each API endpoint has configurable error handling
• We follow a centralized logging approach

More Examples: You can find similar patterns in:

• src/middleware/error-middleware.ts
• src/utils/validation.ts

2. Documentation Search:

@CharlieHelps, could you find our rate limiting documentation?

After searching through the codebase and documentation, he responds:

Here are relevant resources about rate limiting:

1. Implementation in src/middleware/rate-limit.ts
2. Related PR #345 where we added Redis-based rate limiting
3. Configuration examples in src/config/rate-limit.ts

Best Practices:

• We use Redis for distributed rate limiting
• Each API endpoint has configurable limits
• Error responses follow our standard format

​

Code Contributions

Scenario: You want Charlie to help implement code changes.

1. Request Code Changes:

@CharlieHelps, could you help optimize this function to use async/await?

After analyzing and implementing the changes, he pushes the commits and responds:

Changes pushed in commit 7d20a7. Here’s what I did:

// Before - src/services/data.ts:156
function processData(data) {
  return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
    fetch(url)
      .then((response) => response.json())
      .then((result) => resolve(transform(result)))
      .catch((error) => reject(error));
  });
}

// After
async function processData(data) {
  const response = await fetch(url);
  const result = await response.json();
  return transform(result);
}

Additional Updates:

• Updated related tests in src/services/__tests__/data.test.ts
• Added error handling for network failures
• Updated type definitions to reflect async nature

​

Linear Integration

Scenario: Getting development assistance directly in Linear.

1. Create PR from Linear Issue:

@CharlieHelps create a PR

After analyzing the requirements, he responds:

Created draft PR #789:

• Branch: team-456-fix-error-handling
• Title: “Implement robust error handling for user processor”
• Description includes context from this Linear issue
• Added basic implementation based on the requirements discussed in this thread

Additional Context: I’ve incorporated:

• The error handling patterns we discussed in the comments
• Requirements from the linked issues
• Implementation approach agreed upon in the thread
• Test scenarios mentioned in the acceptance criteria

​

Slack Integration

Scenario: Getting development assistance directly in Slack.

1. Code Review in Slack:

@Charlie review PR #123

After analyzing the PR, he responds:

I’ve reviewed PR #123. Here’s what I found:

1. src/services/auth.ts: Consider using optional chaining here
2. src/utils/transform.ts: This loop could be simplified with .map()
3. src/api/users.ts: Add error handling for the API call

Full Review: See my detailed comments in the PR.

2. Create PR from Linear Issue:

@Charlie create a PR from TEAM-456

After analyzing the requirements, he responds:

Created draft PR #790 from Linear issue TEAM-456:

• Branch: team-456-user-auth-timeout
• Title: “Fix user authentication timeout”
• Description includes context from Linear issue
• Running tests now…

Additional Context: I’ve incorporated the requirements and discussions from the Linear issue.

​

Best Practices

While the examples above show how to use Charlie effectively, here are some key principles to keep in mind:

1. Be Specific in Your Requests

   • Instead of “Fix this,” try “@CharlieHelps, could you help optimize this database query to reduce the number of calls?”
   • Include relevant context about your goals and requirements

2. Keep Pull Requests Focused

   • Submit smaller, focused changes
   • Break large changes into multiple PRs
   • This helps Charlie provide more thorough feedback

3. Engage in Conversations

   • Ask follow-up questions if needed
   • Clarify any suggestions you don’t understand
   • Share your thoughts on recommendations

4. Verify Important Changes

   • Review and test critical suggestions
   • Double-check security-related feedback
   • Validate performance improvements

5. Use Complementary Tools

   • Combine Charlie with your existing tools
   • Keep using linters and automated tests
   • Let each tool focus on its strengths