Menu
Run a lead code review on the current branch or a given PR. Standalone entry point for the lead-reviewer agent.
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
Generate a bespoke issue-workflow for any target project. Phase 1 — a Claude Opus analyst reads the project deeply and produces a disposition report. Phase 2 — on approval, parallel writer agents transplant every Maestro workflow component, adapted to the target project's actual stack, test runner, dev environment, and conventions. Use when a project needs its own self-contained issue-workflow without taking a direct dependency on Maestro.
Show the Maestro command map — a quick reference to all available skills.
Adversarially review a grooming spec before implementation starts. Finds hidden risks, unvalidated assumptions, and missing dependencies. Standalone entry point for the challenger agent.
Run QA validation on a pull request — boots the local environment, tests acceptance criteria, and optionally posts the report as a PR comment. Standalone entry point for the qa-engineer agent.
Groom a single GitHub issue — produce an implementation spec and optionally post the grooming summary as a GitHub comment. Standalone entry point for the grooming-agent.
Check a change against WordPress.org plugin rules and PHPCS standards.
| name | maestro:review |
| description | Run a lead code review on the current branch or a given PR. Standalone entry point for the lead-reviewer agent. |
| argument-hint | ["PR-number-or-URL"] |
Standalone code review for any PR. Runs the full lead-reviewer analysis against the spec and project standards. Posting inline comments and the summary to GitHub is your choice — you are prompted at the end.
If $ARGUMENTS is provided, use it as the PR number or URL.
Otherwise resolve from the current branch:
gh pr list --head "$(git branch --show-current)" --json number,url -q '.[0] | "\(.number) \(.url)"'
If no PR is found, tell the user and stop.
Read .claude/maestro.json. Extract:
TEMP_ROOT = .ai.temp_rootREPO = .ai.repoThen gather from the PR:
gh pr view <PR_NUMBER> --json baseRefName,body -q '{base: .baseRefName, body: .body}'
Extract the base branch and the linked issue number (look for Fixes #N, Closes #N, or
a GitHub issue URL in the PR body).
If a linked issue number was found, check for a spec at:
{TEMP_ROOT}/issues/<N>/spec.md
If the spec exists, pass its path to the agent. If it does not exist, inform the user: "No grooming spec found — the review will check against project standards only (spec compliance section will be skipped)."
Invoke the lead-reviewer sub-agent with:
CURRENT_MODEL: "standalone"session_learnings: read Section 13 of AGENTS.md if it exists, else pass empty stringSTANDALONE MODE — two differences from the normal pipeline run:
- Skip Step 5 (inline PR comments) and Step 5b (summary PR comment). Instead, output the full review report — findings table, blockers, nice-to-haves — as formatted Markdown in your response, in a section titled
## Review Report.- Skip Step 6 (StructuredOutput JSON). Return a short human-readable verdict summary instead: overall verdict, blocker count, and any open questions.
After the agent responds, display its ## Review Report and ask:
Post this review to PR #<PR_NUMBER>? Reply
yesto post inline comments + summary,noto finish here.
If yes — the agent posts inline comments (Step 5) and the summary comment (Step 5b)
using the normal dedup flow. Both respect the <!-- ai-pipeline:lead-review --> marker so
a re-run later (via the pipeline) will update in place rather than duplicate.
If no — confirm the review is complete and finish.