shadcn/ui Code Review
Quick Reference
| Issue Type | Reference | |------------|-----------| | className in CVA, missing VariantProps, compound variants | references/cva-patterns.md | | asChild without Slot, missing Context, component composition | references/composition.md | | Missing focus-visible, aria-invalid, disabled states | references/accessibility.md | | Missing data-slot, incorrect CSS targeting | references/data-slot.md |
Review Checklist
- [ ]
cn()receives className, not CVA variants - [ ]
VariantProps<typeof variants>exported for consumers - [ ] Compound variants used for complex state combinations
- [ ]
asChildpattern uses@radix-ui/react-slot - [ ] Context used for component composition (Card, Accordion, etc.)
- [ ]
focus-visible:states, not just:focus - [ ]
aria-invalid,aria-disabledfor form states - [ ]
disabled:variants for all interactive elements - [ ]
sr-onlyfor screen reader text - [ ]
data-slotattributes for targetable composition parts - [ ] CSS uses
has()selectors for state-based styling - [ ] No direct className overrides of variant styles
Hard gates (before writing findings)
Run these in order. Do not draft user-facing findings until every gate passes for the batch you are about to report.
-
Location evidence — Pass: Each issue lists a repo path and either a line range or a short verbatim quote from the file you read (not from memory or diff-only guesswork).
-
Exemption check — Pass: For each issue, you can state in one line why it is not covered by Valid Patterns (Do NOT Flag).
-
Context-sensitive claims — Pass: For accessibility or Radix-related flags, you checked the file for imports/wrappers showing what actually runs (or you cite the concrete gap).
-
Protocol — Pass: You completed the Pre-Report Verification Checklist in review-verification-protocol for this review.
Valid Patterns (Do NOT Flag)
These are correct patterns that should NOT be flagged as issues:
max-h-(--var)- correct Tailwind v4 CSS variable syntax (NOT v3 bracket notation)text-[color:var(--x)]- valid arbitrary value syntax- Copying shadcn component code into project - intended usage pattern
- Not documenting copied shadcn components - library internals, not custom code
- Using cn() with many arguments - composition is the pattern
- Conditional classes in cn() arrays - valid Tailwind pattern
- Extending primitive components without additional docs - well-known base
Context-Sensitive Rules
Apply these rules with appropriate context awareness:
- Flag accessibility issues ONLY IF not handled by Radix primitives underneath
- Flag missing aria labels ONLY IF component isn't using accessible radix primitive
- Flag variant proliferation ONLY IF variants could be composed from existing
- Flag component documentation ONLY IF it's custom code, not copied shadcn
Library Convention Note
shadcn/ui components are designed to be copied and modified. Code review should focus on:
- Custom modifications made to copied components
- Integration with application state/data
- Accessibility in custom usage contexts
Do NOT flag:
- Standard shadcn component internals
- Radix primitive usage patterns
- Default variant implementations
When to Load References
- Reviewing variant definitions → cva-patterns.md
- Reviewing component composition with asChild → composition.md
- Reviewing form components or interactive elements → accessibility.md
- Reviewing multi-part components (Card, Select, etc.) → data-slot.md
Review Questions
- Are CVA variants properly separated from className props?
- Does asChild composition work correctly with Slot?
- Are all accessibility states (focus, invalid, disabled) handled?
- Are data-slot attributes used for component part targeting?
- Can consumers extend variants without breaking composition?
Before Submitting Findings
Complete Hard gates (especially gate 4), then report only issues that still pass the review-verification-protocol pre-report checks.