name	code-reviewer
description	Automated code review with customizable quality rules
version	1.3.0
author	go-on-team
tags	["code","review","quality","rust","python","typescript","go"]
min_go_on_version	1.0.0

Code Reviewer Skill

Automated code review that checks for common issues, style violations, and potential bugs across multiple programming languages. Reviews are returned as structured feedback with severity levels and line references.

How It Works

Parse input: Extract the source code, language, and optional rule set from the input parameters.
Analyze code: Scan the code for issues matching the specified rules (or default rules if none are provided). Each language has built-in checks for naming conventions, documentation requirements, error handling patterns, and common anti-patterns.
Score findings: Each issue is assigned a severity level — error for definite bugs, warning for style/correctness concerns, and suggestion for improvements.
Format output: Return a structured JSON result with the overall score, a list of findings, and optional fix suggestions.

Input Schema

Parameter	Type	Description
`code`	string	Source code to review
`language`	string	Programming language (`rust`, `python`, `typescript`, `go`, `java`, `cpp`)
`rules`	string[]	Optional: specific rule categories to check (e.g. `naming`, `documentation`, `error-handling`, `security`, `performance`)

Example

{
  "code": "fn add(a: i32, b: i32) -> i32 { a + b }",
  "language": "rust",
  "rules": ["naming", "documentation"]
}

Example Output

{
  "score": 0.85,
  "summary": "Minor documentation issues found",
  "findings": [
    {
      "line": 1,
      "column": 1,
      "severity": "suggestion",
      "rule": "documentation",
      "message": "Function `add` is missing doc comment",
      "suggestion": "Add a `///` doc comment describing the function's purpose, arguments, and return value"
    },
    {
      "line": 1,
      "column": 3,
      "severity": "suggestion",
      "rule": "naming",
      "message": "Parameter `a` has a short name; consider a more descriptive identifier",
      "suggestion": "Rename `a` to something meaningful like `left` or `augend`"
    }
  ],
  "language": "rust",
  "total_lines": 1
}

Más de este repositorio

mismo repositorio

architecture-diagrammer

mikewolfli/go-on

Analyzes project structure, module dependencies, imports, and entry points to generate architecture diagrams in Mermaid format

2026-07-062

data-pipeline-optimizer

mikewolfli/go-on

Analyzes ETL and data pipeline code for optimization opportunities across Python (Pandas, PySpark), Rust (polars, datafusion), SQL, and general pipeline descriptions

2026-07-062

env-config-validator

mikewolfli/go-on

Validates environment variable configurations and config files (YAML, TOML, JSON, .env) for missing required variables, type mismatches, deprecated keys, naming convention violations, secret exposure risks, and invalid value ranges

2026-07-062

performance-analyzer

mikewolfli/go-on

Analyzes code for performance bottlenecks including N+1 queries, O(n^2) or worse algorithms, unnecessary allocations, sync I/O in async contexts, excessive cloning, missing caching opportunities, and large payload transfers. Supports Rust, Python, TypeScript, and Go.

2026-07-062

prompt-optimizer

mikewolfli/go-on

Analyzes, improves, and restructures LLM prompts for clarity, efficiency, and reliability

2026-07-062

security-auditor

mikewolfli/go-on

Analyzes source code for common security vulnerabilities including SQL injection, XSS, command injection, hardcoded secrets, insecure deserialization, path traversal, and SSRF

2026-07-062

Code Reviewer Skill

How It Works

Parse input: Extract the source code, language, and optional rule set from the input parameters.

Analyze code: Scan the code for issues matching the specified rules (or default rules if none are provided). Each language has built-in checks for naming conventions, documentation requirements, error handling patterns, and common anti-patterns.

Score findings: Each issue is assigned a severity level — error for definite bugs, warning for style/correctness concerns, and suggestion for improvements.

Format output: Return a structured JSON result with the overall score, a list of findings, and optional fix suggestions.

Input Schema

Parameter

Type

Description

code

string

Source code to review

language

string

Programming language (rust, python, typescript, go, java, cpp)

rules

string[]

Optional: specific rule categories to check (e.g. naming, documentation, error-handling, security, performance)

Example

{ "code": "fn add(a: i32, b: i32) -> i32 { a + b }", "language": "rust", "rules": ["naming", "documentation"] }

Example Output

{ "score": 0.85, "summary": "Minor documentation issues found", "findings": [ { "line": 1, "column": 1, "severity": "suggestion", "rule": "documentation", "message": "Function `add` is missing doc comment", "suggestion": "Add a `///` doc comment describing the function's purpose, arguments, and return value" }, { "line": 1, "column": 3, "severity": "suggestion", "rule": "naming", "message": "Parameter `a` has a short name; consider a more descriptive identifier", "suggestion": "Rename `a` to something meaningful like `left` or `augend`" } ], "language": "rust", "total_lines": 1 }