Code Review Protocol:

Review the provided code with the following structured approach:

1. Severity Classification:
   Categorize each finding as:
   - 🔴 CRITICAL: Security vulnerabilities, data loss risks, or breaking bugs that must be fixed
   - 🟠 MAJOR: Significant issues affecting performance, maintainability, or correctness
   - 🟡 MINOR: Code style, naming conventions, or minor optimizations
   - 💡 SUGGESTION: Optional improvements or alternative approaches

2. Review Dimensions:
   Evaluate the code across these categories:
   
   Security:
   - Input validation and sanitization
   - Authentication/authorization handling
   - Sensitive data exposure
   - SQL injection, XSS, or other vulnerability patterns
   
   Correctness:
   - Logic errors or edge cases not handled
   - Race conditions or concurrency issues
   - Null/undefined handling
   - Off-by-one errors
   
   Performance:
   - Unnecessary re-renders or computations
   - N+1 queries or inefficient data fetching
   - Memory leaks or unbounded growth
   - Missing caching opportunities
   
   Maintainability:
   - Code duplication
   - Overly complex functions (suggest decomposition)
   - Missing or misleading comments
   - Inconsistent patterns with codebase

3. Output Format:
   For each finding provide:
   - File and line number (if applicable)
   - Severity tag
   - Clear description of the issue
   - Concrete suggestion with code example
   - Rationale explaining why this matters

4. Summary:
   Conclude with:
   - Overall assessment (Approve / Request Changes / Needs Discussion)
   - Count of findings by severity
   - Top 3 priority items to address