Install with Codex or Claude Copy this prompt, paste it into Codex, Claude, or another assistant, and let it review the skill page and install it for you.
A direct command skips the review prompt. Inspect the source before running it.
Code review with semantic diffs, expert routing, and auto-TaskCreate. Triggers on: code review, review changes, check code, review PR, security audit.
when_to_use
Use when the user asks for a code review of staged changes, specific files, or a PR — e.g. 'review my changes', 'check this code before commit', 'security audit this diff', 'review PR 12'.
Perform comprehensive code reviews on staged changes, specific files, or pull requests. Dispatches general-purpose reviewers that preload the relevant -ops skill based on file types and automatically creates tasks for critical issues.
# Claude Code conventionscat AGENTS.md 2>/dev/null | head -50
cat CLAUDE.md 2>/dev/null | head -50
# Linting configscat .eslintrc* 2>/dev/null | head -30
cat .prettierrc* 2>/dev/null
cat pyproject.toml 2>/dev/null | head -30
# Test framework detectioncat package.json 2>/dev/null | jq '.devDependencies | keys | map(select(test("jest|vitest|mocha|cypress|playwright")))' 2>/dev/null
Check CI for existing linting:
cat .github/workflows/*.yml 2>/dev/null | grep -E "eslint|prettier|pylint|ruff" | head -10
Step 4: Route to Reviewers
Dispatch is skills-first: domain knowledge lives in -ops skills, and the generic general-purpose subagent preloads the relevant SKILL.md before reviewing.
### Step 6: Integration
**Auto-create tasks for CRITICAL issues:**
TaskCreate:
subject: "Fix: SQL injection in login.ts:42"
description: "SQL injection vulnerability found in user input handling."
activeForm: "Fixing SQL injection in login.ts:42"
**Link with dependencies for related issues:**
TaskCreate: #1 "Fix SQL injection in login.ts"
TaskCreate: #2 "Fix SQL injection in register.ts"
TaskUpdate: taskId: "2", addBlockedBy: ["1"]
**After fixing issues:**
TaskUpdate:
taskId: "1"
status: "completed"
---
## Severity System
| Level | Icon | Meaning | Action | Auto-Task? |
|-------|------|---------|--------|------------|
| CRITICAL | :red_circle: | Security bug, data loss risk, crashes | Must fix before merge | Yes |
| WARNING | :yellow_circle: | Logic issues, performance problems | Should address | No |
| SUGGESTION | :blue_circle: | Style, minor improvements | Optional | No |
| PRAISE | :star: | Good patterns worth noting | Recognition | No |
---
## Focus Modes
| Mode | What It Checks |
|------|----------------|
| `--security` | OWASP top 10, secrets in code, injection, auth issues |
| `--perf` | N+1 queries, unnecessary re-renders, complexity, memory |
| `--types` | Type safety, `any` usage, generics, null handling |
| `--tests` | Coverage gaps, test quality, mocking patterns |
| `--style` | Naming, organization, dead code, comments |
| (default) | All of the above |
---
## Depth Modes
| Mode | Behavior |
|------|----------|
| `--quick` | Surface-level scan, obvious issues only |
| `--normal` | Standard review, all severity levels (default) |
| `--thorough` | Deep analysis, traces data flow, checks edge cases |
---
## Advanced Flags
### `--base <branch>` - Baseline Comparison
Compare changes against a specific branch instead of HEAD:
```bash
/review --base main
/review src/ --base develop --thorough