| name | review-all |
| description | "Use when preparing a PR or completing a phase of work and needing a full-spectrum code review. Runs security, API audit, and scope reviewers in parallel and synthesizes findings into a single go/no-go report. Read-only — no file modifications. Keywords: pre-PR review, security audit, API audit, scope review, code review, merge check. Triggers on "review all changes" or "run pre-PR review"." |
Review All
When to Use
Load this skill when the user request matches the frontmatter description for Review All.
Comprehensive pre-PR review: run specialized reviewers in parallel, synthesize into a single report. Read-only — no changes.
NEVER
- Never let any reviewer edit files during this pipeline — read-only is non-negotiable.
- Never report duplicate findings separately when two reviewers flag the same line — merge into one finding.
- Never review the whole repository when the user only changed a narrow diff — scope to changed files.
- Never use this as a substitute for lint, typecheck, or tests — it complements them, runs after them.
- Never run this for implementation tasks or auto-remediation requests — wrong tool.
Pipeline
Step 1: Identify changed files
git diff --name-only main...HEAD
Step 2: Launch parallel review agents
Spawn all agents simultaneously via Task tool:
| Agent | Type | Scope | Checks |
|---|
| Security Reviewer | security-reviewer (custom) | Changed files only | OWASP Top 10, IDOR, injection, auth gaps |
| API Route Auditor | Explore agent | Routes + types dirs | Schema coverage, type drift, auth hooks |
| Scope Auditor | Explore agent | git diff output | Out-of-scope modifications, formatting-only noise |
Add project-specific reviewers as needed (DB query reviewer, framework reviewer).
Step 3: Synthesize report
## Pre-PR Review Report
### Summary
| Reviewer | Findings | Critical | Warnings |
|-----------|----------|----------|----------|
| Security | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| API Audit | 3 | 1 | 2 |
| Scope | 1 | 0 | 1 |
### Critical Issues (must fix before merge)
[CRITICAL/HIGH findings with file:line references]
### Warnings (consider fixing)
[MEDIUM/LOW findings]
### Clean Areas
[What passed with no issues]
Step 4: Verdict
End with one clear statement:
- READY TO MERGE — No critical issues, warnings acceptable
- NEEDS FIXES — Critical issues found; list exactly what must change
- NEEDS DISCUSSION — Architectural concerns or ambiguous scope
Arguments
- (empty): Review changes vs
main
HEAD~3: Review last 3 commits--security-only: Only security reviewer
