Menu
Use when reviewing frontend code changes for correctness, quality, performance, and maintainability risks.
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
Use when designing, reviewing, or modifying backend API endpoints, schemas, validation, and API documentation.
Use when reviewing architecture boundaries, dependency direction, or multi-layer design decisions across modules.
Use when shaping new features or behavior changes that need requirements clarification and option tradeoff exploration before implementation.
Use when React components are too large or complex and need extraction, simplification, or separation of concerns.
Use when facing 2+ independent tasks that can be worked on without shared state or sequential dependencies
Use when modeling domain concepts, aggregates, and bounded contexts or checking DDD alignment in existing code.
| name | frontend-code-review |
| description | Use when reviewing frontend code changes for correctness, quality, performance, and maintainability risks. |
Use this skill whenever the user asks to review frontend code (especially .tsx, .ts, or .js files). Support two review modes:
Stick to the checklist below for every applicable file and mode.
See references/code-quality.md, references/performance.md, references/business-logic.md for the living checklist split by category.
Flag each rule violation with urgency metadata so future reviewers can prioritize fixes.
When invoked, the response must exactly follow one of the two templates:
Found urgent issues need to be fixed:
FilePath: line
... (repeat for each urgent issue) ...
Found suggestions for improvement:
FilePath: line
... (repeat for each suggestion) ...
If there are no urgent issues, omit that section. If there are no suggestions, omit that section. If the issue number is more than 10, summarize as "10+ urgent issues" or "10+ suggestions" and just output the first 10 issues. Don't compress the blank lines between sections; keep them as-is for readability.
No issues found.
