Yes
Only questions are required to have embedded code. If you can still provide good information even without any code snippets, then there are no problems with your review.
– Jamal's answer to "A code review without the code" © CC BY-SA 3.0
An answer is quite personal, and so as long as you review the code, we can't slap you on the wrists. We may not upvote if we don't like the review, or disagree with it. But if code blocks help you review then keep using them. It's what they're there for. And don't forget, they're optional too. So an answer with no code can be fine too.
– Peilonrayz' answer to "Is it acceptable for an answer to contain fully rewritten code?" © CC BY-SA 3.0
Whether [a] review includes any code, fully functional code, pseudocode or an illustrative example thrown together is not that important. It's generally good tone to mark pseudocode and "demonstration" as such (though that's IMO easily recognizable). Also giving a quick heads up that you didn't test the code is not unheard of, but it's not mandatory, so long as it's not obviously broken.
Adding code is not mandatory in the first place, and OP is not entitled to a review being a free rewrite of their code. As such your code doesn't need to be "perfect".
– Vogel612's answer to "If my review includes code, must it be a perfectly working solution to the OP's problem?" © CC BY-SA 3.0
Other than CoC or other serious violations we have one rule for answers; each and every answer must make one Insightful Observation (IO).
[The answer] explained in what aspect it was better (it's faster) and why it was better in that aspect (it removes a linear search from the loop).
– Peter Taylor's answer to "Alternate solution - what counts as an insightful observation?" © CC BY-SA 4.0