| name | review-stata |
| description | Run the stata-reviewer agent on a do-file. Produces a structured code-review report covering reproducibility, logging, naming, magic numbers, table/figure quality, and conformance to project conventions. |
| disable-model-invocation | true |
| argument-hint | [path/to/file.do] |
| allowed-tools | ["Read","Grep","Glob","Task"] |
Review a Stata Do-File
Delegate to the stata-reviewer agent and report the findings.
Steps
-
Resolve target from $ARGUMENTS:
- Full path: use it
- Filename only: search
dofiles/**/*.do
- No argument: list
dofiles/**/*.do and ask the user which to review
-
Confirm the file exists and is non-empty.
-
Invoke the agent:
Delegate to stata-reviewer:
"Review dofiles/<stage>/<file>.do.
Read the do-file, the most recent log at logs/<stage>_<file>.log (if it exists),
and follow stata-coding-conventions, stata-reproducibility-protocol, and quality-gates.
Produce the report in the standard format."
-
Receive the agent's report at quality_reports/<dofile>_stata_review.md.
-
Summarize for the user:
- Quality score
- Total issues by severity
- Top 3 critical/high issues with line references
- Verdict: ready-to-commit / needs-revision
-
Offer to apply fixes for high-confidence single-line issues (per proofreading-protocol's propose-then-apply pattern). Never apply silently.
Examples
-
/review-stata dofiles/03_analysis/main_regression.do
→ Full review with score and issue list.
-
/review-stata main_regression
→ Searches dofiles/**/main_regression.do.
-
/review-stata (no argument)
→ Lists candidates and asks.
Troubleshooting
- Agent reports "no log file" — run the do-file via
/run-stata first; the reviewer benefits from log context.
- Score is high but you suspect a substantive issue —
stata-reviewer covers code quality, not econometric correctness. Use econometric-reviewer (or /devils-advocate) for that.
- Agent disagrees with your style — adjust
stata-coding-conventions.md for project-specific overrides; the agent reads that rule.
Notes
- This skill scores code quality, not result correctness. For result correctness use
/validate-log (claims) and the econometric-reviewer agent (specs).
- The review report lives in
quality_reports/ and persists across sessions; re-running this skill overwrites the previous report for that file.
