A good reviewer is one that does the following;

• Provides a thorough and comprehensive report
• Submits the report on time
• Provides well-founded comments for authors
• Gives constructive criticism
• Demonstrates objectivity
• Provides a clear recommendation to the editor

In course of reviewing any manuscript, the reviewers are expected to adhere to the following as provided by sage research academy concerning the review process.

First impressions

• Is the research original, novel and
  important to the field?
• Has the appropriate structure and
  language been used?

Abstract

• Is it really a summary?
• Does it include key findings?
  Is it an appropriate length?

Introduction

• Is it effective, clear and well
  organized?
• Does it really introduce and put
  into perspective what follows?
• Suggest changes in organization
  and point authors to appropriate
• Be specific – don’t write “the
  authors have done a poor job”

Methodology

• Can a colleague reproduce the
  experiments and get the same
  outcomes?
• Did the authors include proper
  references to previously published
  methodology?
• Is the description of new
  methodology accurate?
• Could or should the authors have
  included supplementary material?

Results and discussion

• Suggest improvements in the way
  data is shown
• Comment on general logic and
  on justification of interpretations
  and conclusions
• Comment on the number of
  figures, tables and schemes
• Write concisely and precisely
  which changes you recommend
• List separately suggested changes
  in style, grammar and other small
  changes
• Suggest additional experiments
  or analyses
• Make clear the need for
  changes/updates
• Ask yourself whether the
  manuscript should be published
  at all

Conclusion

• Comment on importance,
  validity and generality of
  conclusions
• Request toning down of
  unjustified claims and
  generalizations
• Request removal of redundancies
  and summaries
• The abstract, not the conclusion,
  summarizes the study

References, tables and figures

• Check accuracy, number
  and citation appropriateness
• Comment on any footnotes
• Comment on figures, their
  quality and readability
• Assess completeness of legends,
  headers and axis labels
• Check presentation consistency
• Comment on need for colour in
  figures