Optimize reviewing-changes skill (#6099)

Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: claude[bot] <209825114+claude[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

.claude/skills/reviewing-changes/checklists/dependency-update.md

@@ -0,0 +1,166 @@
+# Dependency Update Review Checklist
+
+## Multi-Pass Strategy
+
+### First Pass: Identify and Assess
+
+<thinking>
+Before diving into details:
+1. Which dependencies were updated?
+2. What are the version changes? (patch, minor, major)
+3. Are any security-sensitive libraries involved? (crypto, auth, networking)
+4. Any pre-release versions (alpha, beta, RC)?
+5. What's the blast radius if something breaks?
+</thinking>
+
+**1. Identify the change:**
+- Which library? Old version → New version?
+- Major (X.0.0), Minor (0.X.0), or Patch (0.0.X) version change?
+- Single dependency or multiple?
+
+**2. Check compilation safety:**
+- Any imports in codebase that might break?
+- Any deprecated APIs we're currently using?
+- Check if this is a breaking change version
+
+### Second Pass: Deep Analysis
+
+<thinking>
+For each dependency update:
+1. What changes are in this release?
+2. Are there breaking changes?
+3. Are there security fixes?
+4. Do we use the affected APIs?
+5. How does this affect our codebase?
+</thinking>
+
+**3. Review release notes** (if available):
+- Breaking changes mentioned?
+- Security fixes included?
+- New features we should know about?
+- Deprecations that affect our usage?
+
+**4. Verify consistency:**
+- If updating androidx library, are related libraries updated consistently?
+- BOM (Bill of Materials) consistency if applicable?
+- Test dependencies updated alongside main dependencies?
+
+## What to CHECK
+
+✅ **Compilation Safety**
+- Look for API deprecations in our codebase
+- Check if import statements still valid
+- Major version bumps require extra scrutiny
+- Beta/alpha versions need stability assessment
+
+✅ **Security Implications** (if applicable)
+- Security-related libraries (crypto, auth, networking)?
+- Check for CVEs addressed in release notes
+- Review security advisories for this library
+
+✅ **Testing Implications**
+- Does this affect test utilities?
+- Are there breaking changes in test APIs?
+- Do existing tests still cover the same scenarios?
+
+✅ **Changelog Review**
+- Read release notes for breaking changes
+- Note any behavioral changes
+- Check migration guides if major version
+
+## What to SKIP
+
+❌ **Full Architecture Review** - No code changed, patterns unchanged
+❌ **Code Style Review** - No code to review
+❌ **New Test Requirements** - Unless API changed significantly
+❌ **Security Deep-Dive** - Unless crypto/auth/networking library
+❌ **Performance Analysis** - Unless release notes mention performance changes
+
+## Red Flags (Escalate to Full Review)
+
+🚩 **Major version bump** (e.g., 1.x → 2.0) - Read `checklists/feature-addition.md`
+🚩 **Security/crypto library** - Read `reference/architectural-patterns.md` and `docs/ARCHITECTURE.md#security`
+🚩 **Breaking changes in release notes** - Read relevant code sections carefully
+🚩 **Multiple dependency updates at once** - Check for interaction risks
+🚩 **Beta/Alpha versions** - Assess stability concerns and rollback plan
+
+If any red flags present, escalate to more comprehensive review using appropriate checklist.
+
+## Prioritizing Findings
+
+Use `reference/priority-framework.md` to classify findings as Critical/Important/Suggested/Optional.
+
+## Output Format
+
+Follow the format guidance from `SKILL.md` Step 5 (concise summary with critical issues only, detailed inline comments with `<details>` tags).
+
+```markdown
+**Overall Assessment:** APPROVE / REQUEST CHANGES
+
+**Critical Issues** (if any):
+- [One-line summary of each critical blocking issue with file:line reference]
+
+See inline comments for all issue details.
+```
+
+## Example Reviews
+
+### Example 1: Simple Patch Version (No Critical Issues)
+
+```markdown
+**Overall Assessment:** APPROVE
+
+See inline comments for all issue details.
+```
+
+**Inline comment example:**
+```
+**libs.versions.toml:45** - SUGGESTED: Beta version in production
+
+<details>
+<summary>Details</summary>
+
+androidx.credentials updated from 1.5.0 to 1.6.0-beta03
+
+Monitor for stability issues - beta releases may have unexpected behavior in production.
+
+Changelog: Adds support for additional credential types, internal bug fixes.
+</details>
+```
+
+### Example 2: Major Version with Breaking Changes (With Critical Issues)
+
+```markdown
+**Overall Assessment:** REQUEST CHANGES
+
+**Critical Issues:**
+- Breaking API changes in Retrofit 3.0.0 (network/api/BitwardenApiService.kt)
+- Breaking API changes in Retrofit 3.0.0 (network/api/VaultApiService.kt)
+
+See inline comments for migration details.
+```
+
+**Inline comment example:**
+```
+**network/api/BitwardenApiService.kt:15** - CRITICAL: Breaking API changes
+
+<details>
+<summary>Details and fix</summary>
+
+Retrofit 3.0.0 removes `Call<T>` return type. Migration required:
+
+\```kotlin
+// Before
+fun getUser(): Call<UserResponse>
+
+// After
+suspend fun getUser(): Response<UserResponse>
+\```
+
+Update all API service interfaces to use suspend functions, update call sites to use coroutines instead of enqueue/execute, and update tests accordingly.
+
+Consider creating a separate PR for this migration due to scope.
+
+Reference: https://github.com/square/retrofit/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md#version-300
+</details>
+```