Langgraph Code Review

LangGraph Code Review

When reviewing LangGraph code, check for these categories of issues.

Anti-confabulation (gate 0 — runs before every other gate)

Before issuing any finding — flag a bug, anti-pattern, or improvement — you MUST echo the exact artifact you are judging, quoted from a source you read in this turn:

• The code finding: its file:line plus the cited code, read freshly now.
• The graph/state code under review: the StateGraph, node, edge, or state-schema snippet your finding depends on, quoted from the file you just read.

The artifact is the only source of truth. Never infer what you are reviewing from the branch name, the working directory, surrounding files, or recollection. If your mental model differs from the freshly read source, the source wins. A finding issued without a same-turn echo of its target is invalid — emit the echo first, or do not emit the finding.

This gate exists because an LLM under contextual priming will confidently flag code that is not in the file. It runs before the gates below.

Review gates (sequenced)

Complete in order. Each step has an objective pass condition before moving on.

1. Locate graph code — Search the review scope for StateGraph, compile(, invoke, ainvoke, add_node, add_edge, add_conditional_edges. Pass: a short list of file paths (or explicit “none in scope” after searching).

1. Map state schema — For each graph state type (TypedDict, BaseModel, etc.), list fields that hold lists, dicts, or messages and whether Annotated + reducers (add_messages, operator.add, …) are present. Pass: every such field is either covered by a reducer pattern below or explicitly flagged as intentional overwrite.

1. Trace persistence — If interrupts, thread_id, or checkpoint APIs appear, follow them to compile(..., checkpointer=...) and invocation config. Pass: behavior matches the interrupt/checkpointer/thread_id guidance below—or you document a concrete mismatch with file:line.

1. Report with evidence — For each finding you will deliver, record file path and line number(s) (or a minimal quoted snippet). Pass: no critical or high-severity issue is stated without that citation.

1. Run the checklist — Use the checklist at the end of this skill; each item is satisfied, not applicable (with reason), or open with evidence. Pass: no item left silently unchecked.

Critical Issues

1. State Mutation Instead of Return

# BAD - mutates state directly
def my_node(state: State) -> None:
    state["messages"].append(new_message)  # Mutation!

# GOOD - returns partial update
def my_node(state: State) -> dict:
    return {"messages": [new_message]}  # Let reducer handle it

2. Missing Reducer for List Fields

# BAD - no reducer, each node overwrites
class State(TypedDict):
    messages: list  # Will be overwritten, not appended!

# GOOD - reducer appends
class State(TypedDict):
    messages: Annotated[list, operator.add]
    # Or use add_messages for chat:
    messages: Annotated[list, add_messages]

3. Wrong Return Type from Conditional Edge

# BAD - returns invalid node name
def router(state) -> str:
    return "nonexistent_node"  # Runtime error!

# GOOD - use Literal type hint for safety
def router(state) -> Literal["agent", "tools", "__end__"]:
    if condition:
        return "agent"
    return END  # Use constant, not string

4. Missing Checkpointer for Interrupts

# BAD - interrupt without checkpointer
def my_node(state):
    answer = interrupt("question")  # Will fail!
    return {"answer": answer}

graph = builder.compile()  # No checkpointer!

# GOOD - checkpointer required for interrupts
graph = builder.compile(checkpointer=InMemorySaver())

5. Forgetting Thread ID with Checkpointer

# BAD - no thread_id
graph.invoke({"messages": [...]})  # Error with checkpointer!

# GOOD - always provide thread_id
config = {"configurable": {"thread_id": "user-123"}}
graph.invoke({"messages": [...]}, config)

State Schema Issues

6. Using add_messages Without Message Types

# BAD - add_messages expects message-like objects
class State(TypedDict):
    messages: Annotated[list, add_messages]

def node(state):
    return {"messages": ["plain string"]}  # May fail!

# GOOD - use proper message types or tuples
def node(state):
    return {"messages": [("assistant", "response")]}
    # Or: [AIMessage(content="response")]

7. Returning Full State Instead of Partial

# BAD - returns entire state (may reset other fields)
def my_node(state: State) -> State:
    return {
        "counter": state["counter"] + 1,
        "messages": state["messages"],  # Unnecessary!
        "other": state["other"]          # Unnecessary!
    }

# GOOD - return only changed fields
def my_node(state: State) -> dict:
    return {"counter": state["counter"] + 1}

8. Pydantic State Without Annotations

# BAD - Pydantic model without reducer loses append behavior
class State(BaseModel):
    messages: list  # No reducer!

# GOOD - use Annotated even with Pydantic
class State(BaseModel):
    messages: Annotated[list, add_messages]

Graph Structure Issues

9. Missing Entry Point

# BAD - no edge from START
builder.add_node("process", process_fn)
builder.add_edge("process", END)
graph = builder.compile()  # Error: no entrypoint!

# GOOD - connect START
builder.add_edge(START, "process")

10. Unreachable Nodes

# BAD - orphan node
builder.add_node("main", main_fn)
builder.add_node("orphan", orphan_fn)  # Never reached!
builder.add_edge(START, "main")
builder.add_edge("main", END)

# Check with visualization
print(graph.get_graph().draw_mermaid())

11. Conditional Edge Without All Paths

# BAD - missing path in conditional
def router(state) -> Literal["a", "b", "c"]:
    ...

builder.add_conditional_edges("node", router, {"a": "a", "b": "b"})
# "c" path missing!

# GOOD - include all possible returns
builder.add_conditional_edges("node", router, {"a": "a", "b": "b", "c": "c"})
# Or omit path_map to use return values as node names

12. Command Without destinations

# BAD - Command return without destinations (breaks visualization)
def dynamic(state) -> Command[Literal["next", "__end__"]]:
    return Command(goto="next")

builder.add_node("dynamic", dynamic)  # Graph viz won't show edges

# GOOD - declare destinations
builder.add_node("dynamic", dynamic, destinations=["next", END])

Async Issues

13. Mixing Sync/Async Incorrectly

# BAD - async node called with sync invoke
async def my_node(state):
    result = await async_operation()
    return {"result": result}

graph.invoke(input)  # May not await properly!

# GOOD - use ainvoke for async graphs
await graph.ainvoke(input)
# Or provide both sync and async versions

14. Blocking Calls in Async Context

# BAD - blocking call in async node
async def my_node(state):
    result = requests.get(url)  # Blocks event loop!
    return {"result": result}

# GOOD - use async HTTP client
async def my_node(state):
    async with httpx.AsyncClient() as client:
        result = await client.get(url)
    return {"result": result}

Tool Integration Issues

15. Tool Calls Without Corresponding ToolMessage

# BAD - AI message with tool_calls but no tool execution
messages = [
    HumanMessage(content="search for X"),
    AIMessage(content="", tool_calls=[{"id": "1", "name": "search", ...}])
    # Missing ToolMessage! Next LLM call will fail
]

# GOOD - always pair tool_calls with ToolMessage
messages = [
    HumanMessage(content="search for X"),
    AIMessage(content="", tool_calls=[{"id": "1", "name": "search", ...}]),
    ToolMessage(content="results", tool_call_id="1")
]

16. Parallel Tool Calls Before Interrupt