In modern dev teams, code reviews need same care as building good architecture - clean interfaces, clear protocols, and proper documentation! TOGAF's communication framework shows us structured feedback loops matter big time. We've found adding quick architecture decision records (ADRs) to review comments helps tons - like having GPS instead of paper map. And hey, sometimes jumping into 15-min pair programming beats writing novel-length comments 😉 Works like magic for explaining tricky design patterns or complex refactoring decisions!

To clear up misunderstandings in remote code reviews: Communicate Clearly: Use precise language and examples when giving feedback. Ask Questions: Seek clarification instead of assuming intent. Use Comments Strategically: Focus on the "why" behind suggestions, not just the "what." Encourage Discussion: Schedule quick calls or video chats if issues persist. Document Guidelines: Align on coding standards and expectations upfront. Stay Respectful: Foster a collaborative, non-confrontational tone. Good communication fosters understanding and builds trust.

• Establish clear architectural guidelines and coding standards to ensure alignment. • Encourage reviewers to explain the “why” behind design decisions. • Use architecture diagrams to show how changes fit into the broader system. • Review code with layered architecture in mind, ensuring responsibilities are placed correctly. • Structure feedback around architectural patterns and goals. • Consider long-term impacts on maintainability, scalability, and other qualities. • Use specific, architecture-focused questions in reviews. • Capture new architectural decisions in Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) for clarity. This approach aligns team understanding with both code quality and system goals.

In development, there will be times that remote reviews would not be enough to align your concerns, questions, and clarifications with the developer. When that happens, I first provide a detailed feedback on the PR and then send the link of my comment to the developer or the team to pair and discuss. At times, it's also good to discuss it on a team sync so everyone would be aware and possibly provide their helpful insights as well. Also, I ensure that when making PR comments I put the reason of my request/feedback and some references so the developer would understand the reason behind the request.

One thing I have found helpful in remote code review is having a good structure, coding guidelines and practices. As an application security engineer, I do mention to the developers I have worked with the importance of writing a clean and secure code. If you work with me as a developer, I will let you have a checklist of what to watch out for, what our standard is in the business before hand so as not to have issues while reviewing your codes. If there happens to be an issue then you'll know you're at fault and not that you weren't informed. A good guidelines and standard for writing code as a business helps a lot

1. If you don’t fully understand a piece of feedback, don't hesitate to ask for clarification. Rather than making assumptions, ask the reviewer to explain their reasoning or provide more detail. 2. At the beginning of a project or review cycle, agree on standards, style guides, and key requirements with the team. This helps everyone have a common understanding of expectations and reduces the likelihood of misinterpretation later. 3. If you disagree with a point, it’s okay to discuss it openly—just be respectful and focus on finding a solution that works best for the codebase and the team.

I agree with Nadeem's answer. whthout a good archietcture and industry specific coding style, you can't easily get rid out of it. Your years of experience also matters it helps to get less chances of misunderstanding. I don't think a misunderstanding happens when you have clear protocols.