Menu
Shared /code-review finder-angle block covering line-by-line diff scanning, removed-behavior auditing, and cross-file tracing
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
Instructions for creating dashboard artifacts with KPI tiles, chart specifications, and breakdown tables from the built-in template
Instructions for creating sortable and filterable data-table artifacts from the built-in template
Instructions for creating explainer artifacts with numbered-step or section walkthrough structures from the built-in template
Instructions for creating long-form report artifacts with a masthead, table of contents, structured sections, and optional appendix from the built-in template
Guided setup and customization workflow for auto mode environment context, optional rule carve-outs, and settings updates
Template for medium and high inline code-review prompts that run eight finder angles, deduplicate without verification, and enforce a minimum findings target
| name | code-review-correctness-finder-angles |
| description | Shared /code-review finder-angle block covering line-by-line diff scanning, removed-behavior auditing, and cross-file tracing |
| metadata | {"originalName":"Skill: Code Review correctness finder angles","ccVersion":"2.1.206","sourceUrl":"https://github.com/Piebald-AI/claude-code-system-prompts/blob/main/system-prompts/skill-code-review-correctness-finder-angles.md","source":{"owner":"Piebald-AI","repo":"claude-code-system-prompts","ref":"main","path":"system-prompts/skill-code-review-correctness-finder-angles.md"}} |
Read every hunk in the diff, line by line. Then Read the enclosing function for
each hunk — bugs in unchanged lines of a touched function are in scope (the PR
re-exposes or fails to fix them). For every line ask: what input, state, timing,
or platform makes this line wrong? Look for inverted/wrong conditions,
off-by-one, null/undefined deref, missing await, falsy-zero checks,
wrong-variable copy-paste, error swallowed in catch, unescaped regex metachars.
For every line the diff DELETES or replaces, name the invariant or behavior it enforced, then search the new code for where that invariant is re-established. If you can't find it, that's a candidate: a removed guard, a dropped error path, a narrowed validation, a deleted test that was covering a real case.
For each function the diff changes, find its callers (Grep for the symbol) and check whether the change breaks any call site: a new precondition, a changed return shape, a new exception, a timing/ordering dependency. Also check callees: does a parallel change in the same PR make a call unsafe?
