Skip to main content

code-reviewer

General-purpose code review skill. Provides checklists for security, code quality, performance, and best practices. Use when reviewing code changes, PRs, or performing quality audits.

Datos de origen

Repositorio
kumaran-is/claude-code-onboarding
Última actividad en el origen
29 de marzo de 2026 a las 13:06
Idioma detectado de SKILL.md
inglés
Estrellas
36
Forks
21

Opciones de instalación

De forma predeterminada está seleccionado el prompt que primero revisa el origen. Puedes cambiar a un comando directo o descargar una copia local.

Revisa los archivos de origen

Lee SKILL.md y los archivos complementarios que muestra SkillsMP antes de decidir si quieres instalarlo.

Explorador de archivos
2 archivos

Mostrando SKILL.md

SKILL.md
Instrucciones de origen · Vista previa de solo lectura
name
code-reviewer
description
General-purpose code review skill. Provides checklists for security, code quality, performance, and best practices. Use when reviewing code changes, PRs, or performing quality audits.
allowed-tools
Read, Grep, Glob, Bash
agent
code-reviewer
context
fork
metadata
{"triggers":"code review, review code, PR review, pull request review, code quality, code audit, review this code","related-skills":"security-reviewer, dedup-code-agent, test-driven-development","domain":"quality","role":"specialist","scope":"review","output-format":"report"}
last-reviewed
2026-03-15
**Iron Law:** Never approve code without reading the actual implementation; always provide severity-bucketed findings with file:line evidence. # Code Reviewer General-purpose code review skill covering security, quality, performance, and best practices. ## When to Use - After writing or modifying code - During PR reviews - When auditing code quality ## Process 1. Identify changed files via `git diff` or user request 2. Read [reference/code-review-checklist.md](reference/code-review-checklist.md) for review categories, severity levels, and output format 3. Review each file against the checklist 4. Report findings by severity (Critical > High > Medium > Low) ## Reference Files | File | Contents | Load When | |------|----------|-----------| | `reference/code-review-checklist.md` | Security checks, code quality, performance, best practices, output format | Reviewing any code change, pre-PR checklist, security audit | ## Error Handling If no changes are found, report "No changes detected" and list the files/paths searched. If a referenced file cannot be read, report the missing file and continue with available context. ## Anti-Patterns - **Never rubber-stamp without file:line** — "looks good" with no evidence is a failed review - **Never mark APPROVED if any Critical or High finding is unresolved** — severity discipline is non-negotiable - **Never review from memory** — always read the actual changed files; filenames do not tell you what changed - **Never scope-creep the review** — report what changed, not what you wish were different in adjacent code - **Never merge findings across files** — report per-file with specific line numbers, not aggregate impressions - **Avoid vague findings** — "this could be a security issue" is not a finding; "SQL built via string concatenation at service.ts:47 allows injection" is ## Verify After completing a review: ```bash # Confirm all files you reviewed are the ones that actually changed git diff --name-only HEAD~1 # Confirm no new linting errors introduced npm run lint 2>&1 | grep -E "error|warning" | head -20 # Confirm tests still pass after changes npm test -- --passWithNoTests 2>&1 | tail -5 ``` Report format after verification: ``` REVIEW COMPLETE: - Files reviewed: N (list them) - Findings: X Critical, Y High, Z Medium, W Low - Verdict: APPROVED / NEEDS_REVIEW / REJECT - Evidence: [file:line for each finding] ```
Ver en GitHub