The Code Review Checklist Generator

#CONTEXT
Our team's code reviews are inconsistent. Some reviewers catch architectural problems; others only flag formatting. I need a shared checklist so every review covers the same ground and we stop relitigating style.

#OBJECTIVE
Produce a code review checklist tailored to our stack, our common failure modes, and our team's quality bar. The checklist should be short enough that a reviewer can run it in 10 minutes on a normal PR.

#STYLE
Practical and specific. Each item is a question a reviewer can answer yes/no or a concrete thing to verify. No generic advice like 'ensure code quality.'

#TONE
Written for working engineers, not process auditors. Skip the preamble about why code review matters.

#AUDIENCE
Our engineering team — mixed seniority, reviewing PRs in {{your primary language/framework}}.

#RESPONSE
Structure as a checklist grouped into:
1. **Correctness** (does it do what it claims?) — 3-5 items.
2. **Security** (does it introduce risk?) — 2-4 items, tied to our stack's common vulnerabilities.
3. **Performance** (will it scale or degrade?) — 2-3 items specific to our load patterns.
4. **Maintainability** (will the next engineer understand it?) — 2-3 items.
5. **Tests** (does it prove it works?) — 2-3 items.

Keep the total under 20 items. A 50-item checklist gets ignored.

After the checklist, add a 'Stop reviewing and talk to the author' section — 2-3 signals that the PR needs a conversation, not a comment thread.

Our stack & context:
{{language, framework, database, deployment, team size, common bugs you've shipped}}