| name | onex-pr-review |
| description | Use this skill when reviewing a pull request for merge readiness. The goal is to produce a priority-organized assessment that clearly communicates what must be fixed before merge. |
| disable-model-invocation | true |
onex-pr-review
Use this skill when reviewing a pull request for merge readiness. The goal is to produce a priority-organized assessment that clearly communicates what must be fixed before merge.
Purpose
Systematically review all PR changes, classify issues by severity, and produce a merge readiness verdict. This ensures consistent review standards and prevents critical issues from reaching production.
Prerequisites
- A PR number, branch with open changes, or a pasted diff / list of files to review
- Optional:
gh CLI for gh pr view when you are working against GitHub; if unavailable, use local git diff / Cursor diffs instead
Workflow
-
Fetch PR context.
Run gh pr view <number> --json title,body,files,reviews,comments to gather the full picture. Read the changed files locally to understand the actual diff.
-
Review each changed file.
For every modified file, check for: correctness, security issues, performance regressions, missing tests, breaking API changes, and code quality.
-
Classify findings by priority.
Assign each finding exactly one severity level:
- CRITICAL — Security vulnerabilities, data loss risks, crashes, breaking changes. Must fix before merge.
- MAJOR — Performance problems, incorrect behavior, missing tests, significant quality issues. Should fix before merge.
- MINOR — Code quality improvements, missing docs, edge cases, non-critical refactoring. Should address but not blocking.
- NIT — Formatting, naming, minor style suggestions. Optional — can merge with nits remaining.
-
Assess merge readiness.
The PR is merge-ready only when all CRITICAL, MAJOR, and MINOR issues are resolved. NITs do not block merge.
-
Write the review summary.
Output a priority breakdown table, merge readiness verdict, and each finding grouped by severity with file path and description.
Expected Output Format
A structured review containing:
- Priority breakdown table (count per severity level)
- Merge readiness verdict (ready / not ready)
- Findings grouped by severity (CRITICAL first, then MAJOR, MINOR, NIT)
- Each finding includes: file path, description, and suggested fix
Quality Checklist
