code-review

Stars5

Forks0

UpdatedJune 1, 2026 at 21:28

Review a change for correctness, edge cases, security, tests, and clarity

Installation

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.

Run Skill in Manus

Source

New1Direction

New1Direction/korgex

View GitHub Repository View Creator Repositories

Download

Run Skill in Manus

Related occupationsSOC

Based on SOC occupation classification

Software Quality Assurance Analysts and TestersComputer and Mathematical Occupations·SOC 15-1253

SKILL.md

readonly

name	code-review
description	Review a change for correctness, edge cases, security, tests, and clarity
version	1
trust	built-in

Review the DIFF, but read enough surrounding code to judge it in context.

Get the diff. git diff (or the relevant range). Read each hunk with its surrounding function and callers — a change is only correct in context.
Check, in priority order:
- Correctness: does it do what it claims? Off-by-one, null/empty, error paths.
- Edge cases: boundaries, concurrency, large/empty inputs, failure modes.
- Security: injection (command/SQL/XSS), path traversal, secrets in code, unvalidated input crossing a trust boundary.
- Tests: is the new behaviour covered? Would a test have caught a regression?
- Clarity: names, dead code, needless complexity, comments that explain WHY.
Verify, don't assume. If unsure a branch is reachable or a value can be null, trace it or write a quick check rather than guessing.
Report findings ranked by severity (blocker → nit), each with file:line and a concrete suggested fix. Call out what's GOOD too. Don't invent issues to seem thorough.

More from this repository

same repository

react-doctor

New1Direction/korgex

Catch bad React in your changes — run react-doctor's deterministic scan and fix what it flags

2026-06-055

security-scan

New1Direction/korgex

Run a verifiable security scan (vulns, secrets, misconfig) over code you wrote or deps you added, before calling the work done

2026-06-035

browser-automation

New1Direction/korgex

Drive a real browser verifiably — navigate, snapshot, act BY INDEX, extract; every step provable

2026-06-025

verifiable-orchestration

New1Direction/korgex

Run multi-agent work as ONE provable causal DAG — parallel subagents, an Orchestrate graph, an immutable spec-seed

2026-06-025

building-an-mcp-server

New1Direction/korgex

Author or connect a Model Context Protocol server so an agent gains new tools

2026-06-015

ci-cd-pipelines

New1Direction/korgex

Build automated pipelines that gate merges and ship reliably

2026-06-015

name	code-review
description	Review a change for correctness, edge cases, security, tests, and clarity
version	1
trust	built-in

Review the DIFF, but read enough surrounding code to judge it in context.

Get the diff. git diff (or the relevant range). Read each hunk with its surrounding function and callers — a change is only correct in context.
Check, in priority order:
- Correctness: does it do what it claims? Off-by-one, null/empty, error paths.
- Edge cases: boundaries, concurrency, large/empty inputs, failure modes.
- Security: injection (command/SQL/XSS), path traversal, secrets in code, unvalidated input crossing a trust boundary.
- Tests: is the new behaviour covered? Would a test have caught a regression?
- Clarity: names, dead code, needless complexity, comments that explain WHY.
Verify, don't assume. If unsure a branch is reachable or a value can be null, trace it or write a quick check rather than guessing.
Report findings ranked by severity (blocker → nit), each with file:line and a concrete suggested fix. Call out what's GOOD too. Don't invent issues to seem thorough.