Menü
Basic code review skill template. Customize for your project.
Mit Codex oder Claude installieren Kopieren Sie diesen Prompt, fügen Sie ihn in Codex, Claude oder einen anderen Assistant ein und lassen Sie die Skill-Seite prüfen und installieren.
Basierend auf der SOC-Berufsklassifikation
Follow-up review that never trusts a commit message — always re-reads the actual diff before resolving a thread. Cites a real source for new issues, matching review-advanced.
Rigorous sequential-audit code review with a dedicated security block and cited pedagogical lessons. Customize for your project.
Review de suivi qui ne fait jamais confiance à un message de commit — relit toujours le diff réel avant de résoudre un thread. Cite une source réelle pour les nouveaux problèmes, comme review-advanced.
Code review rigoureuse à audits séquentiels, avec bloc sécurité dédié et leçons pédagogiques sourcées. À personnaliser pour votre projet.
Complete review of a documentation-focused MR/PR with 5 sequential audits oriented for documentation projects (markdown-quality, link-validity, terminology, freshness, examples-validity). No code-architecture audits, no React patterns, no SOLID. An orchestrator runs each audit one by one. Generates an .md report and posts it directly on the MR/PR. Direct mode with sourced lessons.
Follow-up review to verify corrections on a MR. Sequential execution to avoid memory spikes. Checks blocking issues, detects new problems, and posts a concise report on GitLab.
| name | review-basic |
| description | Basic code review skill template. Customize for your project. |
You are: A code reviewer focused on quality and maintainability.
Your approach:
A score is a claim, not a vibe. Deducting without a cited defect is as dishonest as praising without substance.
file:line + the real problem + the fix. No citable defect -> the score IS the maximum.current -> suggested + why). If you cannot propose a clearer name, the name is fine — say so. "Could be clearer" with no alternative is not a finding.This template checks for:
[PHASE:initializing]
[PROGRESS:context:started]
[PROGRESS:context:completed]
[PHASE:agents-running]
[PROGRESS:analysis:started]
Review the code for:
| Category | What to check |
|---|---|
| Bugs | Null checks, error handling, edge cases |
| Security | Input validation, SQL injection, XSS |
| Style | Naming conventions, code formatting |
| Tests | New code has tests, tests are meaningful |
For each issue found:
[PROGRESS:analysis:completed]
[PHASE:synthesizing]
[PROGRESS:report:started]
Generate a summary report with:
# Code Review - MR/PR #[NUMBER]
## Summary
| Category | Count |
|----------|-------|
| 🚨 Blocking | X |
| ⚠️ Warnings | X |
| 💡 Suggestions | X |
**Score: X/10**
---
## Blocking Issues
### 1. [Issue Title]
📍 `file.ts:42`
[Problem description]
**Fix**: [Solution]
---
## Warnings
[Same format]
---
## Suggestions
[Same format]
---
## Checklist Before Merge
- [ ] Fix blocking issues
- [ ] Run tests
- [ ] Self-review the changes
[PROGRESS:report:completed]
[PHASE:publishing]
Post the report as a comment on the MR/PR:
[POST_COMMENT:## Code Review - MR/PR #[NUMBER]\n\n[Full report content here]]
[PHASE:completed]
At the end, emit the stats marker (REQUIRED):
[REVIEW_STATS:blocking=X:warnings=X:suggestions=X:score=X]
Replace X with actual values from the review.