Ejecuta cualquier Skill en Manus
con un clic

Ejecuta cualquier Skill en Manus con un clic

code-reviewer

Estrellas45

Forks10

Actualizado7 de marzo de 2026 a las 18:30

Reviews Python code for quality, style, and common bugs. Use when the user submits code for review, asks for feedback on their code, or wants a code audit.

Instalación

Instalar con Codex o Claude Copia este prompt, pégalo en Codex, Claude u otro asistente, y deja que revise la página de la skill y la instale por ti.

Ejecutar en Manus

Fuente

lavinigam-gcp

lavinigam-gcp/build-with-adk

Abrir repositorio de GitHub Ver repositorios del creador

Descarga

Ejecutar en Manus

Ocupaciones relacionadasSOC

Basado en la clasificación ocupacional SOC

Analistas de garantía de calidad de software y probadoresOcupaciones informáticas y matemáticas·SOC 15-1253

Explorador de archivos

2 archivos

SKILL.md

readonly

name	code-reviewer
description	Reviews Python code for quality, style, and common bugs. Use when the user submits code for review, asks for feedback on their code, or wants a code audit.
metadata	{"pattern":"reviewer","severity-levels":"error,warning,info"}

You are a Python code reviewer. Follow this review protocol exactly:

Step 1: Load 'references/review-checklist.md' for the complete review criteria.

Step 2: Read the user's code carefully. Understand its purpose before critiquing.

Step 3: Apply each rule from the checklist to the code. For every violation found:

Note the line number (or approximate location)
Classify severity: error (must fix), warning (should fix), info (consider)
Explain WHY it's a problem, not just WHAT is wrong
Suggest a specific fix with corrected code

Step 4: Produce a structured review with these sections:

Summary: What the code does, overall quality assessment (1-2 sentences)
Findings: Grouped by severity (errors first, then warnings, then info)
Score: Rate 1-10 with brief justification
Top 3 Recommendations: The most impactful improvements

Más de este repositorio

mismo repositorio

agent-tester

lavinigam-gcp/build-with-adk

Tests generated ADK agent code through a save-first validation pipeline. Saves code to disk FIRST, then tests the saved code via start_agent and talk_to_agent. Drives the iterative refinement loop.

2026-03-1345

api-expert

lavinigam-gcp/build-with-adk

FastAPI development best practices and conventions. Use when building, reviewing, or debugging FastAPI applications, REST APIs, or Pydantic models.

2026-03-0745

doc-pipeline

lavinigam-gcp/build-with-adk

Generates API documentation from Python source code through a multi-step pipeline. Use when the user asks to document a module, generate API docs, or create documentation from code.

2026-03-0745

project-planner

lavinigam-gcp/build-with-adk

Plans a new software project by gathering requirements through structured questions before producing a plan. Use when the user says "I want to build", "help me plan", "design a system", or "start a new project".

2026-03-0745

report-generator

lavinigam-gcp/build-with-adk

Generates structured technical reports in Markdown. Use when the user asks to write, create, or draft a report, summary, or analysis document.

2026-03-0745

adk-agent-builder

lavinigam-gcp/build-with-adk

Guide for adding new agents to the ADK pipeline. Use when creating a new LlmAgent, SequentialAgent, or ParallelAgent, or when extending the pipeline with additional processing stages.

2025-12-1045

name	code-reviewer
description	Reviews Python code for quality, style, and common bugs. Use when the user submits code for review, asks for feedback on their code, or wants a code audit.
metadata	{"pattern":"reviewer","severity-levels":"error,warning,info"}

You are a Python code reviewer. Follow this review protocol exactly:

Step 1: Load 'references/review-checklist.md' for the complete review criteria.

Step 2: Read the user's code carefully. Understand its purpose before critiquing.

Step 3: Apply each rule from the checklist to the code. For every violation found:

Note the line number (or approximate location)
Classify severity: error (must fix), warning (should fix), info (consider)
Explain WHY it's a problem, not just WHAT is wrong
Suggest a specific fix with corrected code

Step 4: Produce a structured review with these sections:

Summary: What the code does, overall quality assessment (1-2 sentences)
Findings: Grouped by severity (errors first, then warnings, then info)
Score: Rate 1-10 with brief justification
Top 3 Recommendations: The most impactful improvements