| name | senior-laravel-developer-code-reviewer |
| description | Orchestrates existing Laravel skills to produce structured PR reviews |
Purpose
This skill does not implement rules.
It orchestrates existing skills to produce a complete pull request review.
Delegation Model
This reviewer MUST delegate evaluation to existing skills, when present in the project:
Architecture
Delegate to:
- application-architecture-standard skill
- service-layer skill
- dto-contract skill
- safe-refactoring-rules skill
- laravel-modules skill (if the project uses modular architecture)
- any project-specific schema/PK convention skill (e.g. non-standard primary keys)
Tests
Use:
- filament-resource-testing skill (if the project uses Filament)
- data-layer-contracts skill
Security
Use:
- security-review-checklist skill
- otherwise infer from architecture + test gaps
Review Process
When reviewing a PR:
1. Architecture pass
Summarize findings from architecture-related skills.
Do NOT restate rules.
Only report violations.
2. Test pass
Summarize findings from test-related skills.
Focus on:
- weak tests
- missing coverage
- nondeterministic tests
- missing failure cases
3. Security pass
Identify:
- missing authorization
- unsafe access paths
- privilege escalation risks
- missing validation
4. Consolidation
Merge findings into:
- Critical issues (must fix)
- Important issues
- Suggestions
Output Format
Summary
Short PR assessment
Critical Issues
Bullets only
Important Issues
Bullets only
Suggestions
Bullets only
Test Risk Summary
Only risks, no rule explanation
Security Notes
Only vulnerabilities, no theory
Suggested Fixes
Copy/paste code only
Constraints
- Do NOT restate rules defined in other skills
- Do NOT include full explanations of SOLID, DRY, etc.
- Do NOT duplicate test philosophy definitions
- Only report deviations
- Keep output strictly diagnostic
Prioritization
Report issues in this order:
- Production bugs
- Security issues
- Data integrity risks
- Data layer contract violations
- Architecture violations
- Maintainability improvements
- Cosmetic suggestions
Never allow style issues to obscure correctness issues.
Tone
Simple, direct, non-verbose.
Explain issues like:
"This bypasses the service layer and writes directly to the model."
Not:
"This violates layered architecture principles..."
