Files
GopherGate/CODE_REVIEW_PLAN.md
hobokenchicken 633b69a07b
Some checks failed
CI / Check (push) Has been cancelled
CI / Clippy (push) Has been cancelled
CI / Formatting (push) Has been cancelled
CI / Test (push) Has been cancelled
CI / Release Build (push) Has been cancelled
docs: sync documentation with current implementation and archive stale plan
2026-03-06 14:28:04 -05:00

66 lines
3.8 KiB
Markdown

# LLM Proxy Code Review Plan
## Overview
The **LLM Proxy** project is a Rust-based middleware designed to provide a unified interface for multiple Large Language Models (LLMs). Based on the repository structure, the project aims to implement a high-performance proxy server (`src/`) that handles request routing, usage tracking, and billing logic. A static dashboard (`static/`) provides a management interface for monitoring consumption and managing API keys. The architecture leverages Rust's async capabilities for efficient request handling and SQLite for persistent state management.
## Review Phases
### Phase 1: Backend Architecture & Rust Logic (@code-reviewer)
- **Focus on:**
- **Core Proxy Logic:** Efficiency of the request/response pipeline and streaming support.
- **State Management:** Thread-safety and shared state patterns using `Arc` and `Mutex`/`RwLock`.
- **Error Handling:** Use of idiomatic Rust error types and propagation.
- **Async Performance:** Proper use of `tokio` or similar runtimes to avoid blocking the executor.
- **Rust Idioms:** Adherence to Clippy suggestions and standard Rust naming conventions.
### Phase 2: Security & Authentication Audit (@security-auditor)
- **Focus on:**
- **API Key Management:** Secure storage, masking in logs, and rotation mechanisms.
- **JWT Handling:** Validation logic, signature verification, and expiration checks.
- **Input Validation:** Sanitization of prompts and configuration parameters to prevent injection.
- **Dependency Audit:** Scanning for known vulnerabilities in the `Cargo.lock` using `cargo-audit`.
### Phase 3: Database & Data Integrity Review (@database-optimizer)
- **Focus on:**
- **Schema Design:** Efficiency of the SQLite schema for usage tracking and billing.
- **Migration Strategy:** Robustness of the migration scripts to prevent data loss.
- **Usage Tracking:** Accuracy of token counting and concurrency handling during increments.
- **Query Optimization:** Identifying potential bottlenecks in reporting queries.
### Phase 4: Frontend & Dashboard Review (@frontend-developer)
- **Focus on:**
- **Vanilla JS Patterns:** Review of Web Components and modular JS in `static/js`.
- **Security:** Protection against XSS in the dashboard and secure handling of local storage.
- **UI/UX Consistency:** Ensuring the management interface is intuitive and responsive.
- **API Integration:** Robustness of the frontend's communication with the Rust backend.
### Phase 5: Infrastructure & Deployment Review (@devops-engineer)
- **Focus on:**
- **Dockerfile Optimization:** Multi-stage builds to minimize image size and attack surface.
- **Resource Limits:** Configuration of CPU/Memory limits for the proxy container.
- **Deployment Docs:** Clarity of the setup process and environment variable documentation.
## Timeline (Gantt)
```mermaid
gantt
title LLM Proxy Code Review Timeline (March 2026)
dateFormat YYYY-MM-DD
section Backend & Security
Architecture & Rust Logic (Phase 1) :active, p1, 2026-03-06, 1d
Security & Auth Audit (Phase 2) :p2, 2026-03-07, 1d
section Data & Frontend
Database & Integrity (Phase 3) :p3, 2026-03-07, 1d
Frontend & Dashboard (Phase 4) :p4, 2026-03-08, 1d
section DevOps
Infra & Deployment (Phase 5) :p5, 2026-03-08, 1d
Final Review & Sign-off :2026-03-08, 4h
```
## Success Criteria
- **Security:** Zero high-priority vulnerabilities identified; all API keys masked in logs.
- **Performance:** Proxy overhead is minimal (<10ms latency addition); queries are indexed.
- **Maintainability:** Code passes all linting (`cargo clippy`) and formatting (`cargo fmt`) checks.
- **Documentation:** README and deployment guides are up-to-date and accurate.
- **Reliability:** Usage tracking matches actual API consumption with 99.9% accuracy.