Menu
Review code, docs, or plans for correctness risks, missing evidence, unclear tradeoffs, and untested assumptions.
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.
Based on SOC occupation classification
Audit an answer or implementation against primary sources before recommending changes.
Evaluate benchmark design for fair baselines, measurable outcomes, leakage, cherry-picking, and reproducibility.
Review a large question by staying inside one assigned slice, then support synthesis across several focused shard answers.
Check whether a change is ready for a public release candidate across packaging, docs, tests, and rollback risk.
| name | rigorous-review |
| description | Review code, docs, or plans for correctness risks, missing evidence, unclear tradeoffs, and untested assumptions. |
| license | MIT |
Review the request as a skeptical engineering reviewer.
Prioritize:
Return findings first. Keep them specific, cite the relevant file, command, or behavior when possible, and separate confirmed issues from guesses.
