Run any Skill in Manus with one click

requesting-code-review

Stars134

Forks12

UpdatedMarch 10, 2026 at 18:20

Use after completing meaningful implementation work in Cursor and before merging or declaring the change ready, so the result gets a focused review for bugs, regressions, and maintainability risks.

Installation

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.

Run Skill in Manus

Source

6BNBN

6BNBN/FlowPilot

View GitHub Repository View Creator Repositories

Download

Run Skill in Manus

Related occupationsSOC

Based on SOC occupation classification

Software Quality Assurance Analysts and TestersComputer and Mathematical Occupations·SOC 15-1253

SKILL.md

readonly

name	requesting-code-review
description	Use after completing meaningful implementation work in Cursor and before merging or declaring the change ready, so the result gets a focused review for bugs, regressions, and maintainability risks.

Requesting Code Review

Goal

Ask for a focused review at the right time, with the right scope.

When To Use

After finishing a substantial feature or bug fix
Before merging or creating a pull request
After a risky refactor
When local changes affect behavior, API contracts, or UI flows

How To Ask

Provide:

what changed
which files or diff should be reviewed
what behavior matters most
any specific concerns such as accessibility, regressions, or edge cases

Good Prompt Shape

"Review the changed files for real bugs and regressions."
"Review this branch diff and focus on API behavior and edge cases."
"Review this UI change for accessibility and misleading interaction states."

After Review

Fix high-severity issues first.
Clarify or push back when a suggestion does not fit the codebase.
Re-run relevant verification before declaring the work ready.

More from this repository

same repository

brainstorming

6BNBN/FlowPilot

You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.

2026-03-10134

code-review

6BNBN/FlowPilot

Use when the user asks to review a pull request or diff with a structured Codex CLI workflow using parallel review passes and filtered actionable findings.

2026-03-10134

dispatching-parallel-agents

6BNBN/FlowPilot

Use when facing 2+ independent tasks that can be worked on without shared state or sequential dependencies.

2026-03-10134

executing-plans

6BNBN/FlowPilot

Use when you have a written implementation plan to execute in a separate session with review checkpoints

2026-03-10134

feature-dev

6BNBN/FlowPilot

Use when the user asks to build a new feature and wants a structured Codex CLI workflow with discovery, clarifying questions, architecture comparison, implementation, and review.

2026-03-10134

finishing-a-development-branch

6BNBN/FlowPilot

Use when implementation is complete, all tests pass, and you need to decide how to integrate the work - guides completion of development work by presenting structured options for merge, PR, or cleanup

2026-03-10134

name	requesting-code-review
description	Use after completing meaningful implementation work in Cursor and before merging or declaring the change ready, so the result gets a focused review for bugs, regressions, and maintainability risks.

Requesting Code Review

Goal

Ask for a focused review at the right time, with the right scope.

When To Use

After finishing a substantial feature or bug fix
Before merging or creating a pull request
After a risky refactor
When local changes affect behavior, API contracts, or UI flows

How To Ask

Provide:

what changed
which files or diff should be reviewed
what behavior matters most
any specific concerns such as accessibility, regressions, or edge cases

Good Prompt Shape

"Review the changed files for real bugs and regressions."
"Review this branch diff and focus on API behavior and edge cases."
"Review this UI change for accessibility and misleading interaction states."

After Review

Fix high-severity issues first.
Clarify or push back when a suggestion does not fit the codebase.
Re-run relevant verification before declaring the work ready.