Exécutez n'importe quel Skill dans Manus
en un clic

Exécutez n'importe quel Skill dans Manus en un clic

Commencer

review-diff

Étoiles2

Forks0

Mis à jour21 mai 2026 à 19:55

Review a code diff for correctness, logic errors, and style issues.

Installation

Installer avec Codex ou Claude Copiez ce prompt, collez-le dans Codex, Claude ou un autre assistant, puis laissez-le vérifier la page du skill et l'installer pour vous.

Exécuter dans Manus

Source

mattmre

mattmre/AGENT33-PUBLIC

Ouvrir le dépôt GitHub Voir les dépôts du créateur

Téléchargement

Exécuter dans Manus

Métiers associésSOC

Basé sur la classification professionnelle SOC

Analystes en assurance qualité des logiciels et testeursProfessions informatiques et mathématiques·SOC 15-1253

SKILL.md

readonly

name	review-diff
version	1.0.0
description	Review a code diff for correctness, logic errors, and style issues.
allowed_tools	["file_ops","shell"]
tags	["code-review","diff","quality"]

Review Diff

Given a code diff (unified diff format or a PR description with changed files), perform a thorough code review covering correctness, logic, and style.

Procedure

Obtain the diff. If a file path is provided, read it with file_ops. If a git ref is given, run git diff <ref> via shell.
Parse the diff into changed hunks grouped by file.
For each changed file, review:
- Correctness: does the logic implement the intended behavior? Look for off-by-one errors, incorrect conditionals, missing edge case handling.
- Error handling: are errors caught and handled appropriately? Check for bare except clauses, swallowed exceptions, missing null checks.
- Data flow: are variables initialized before use? Are mutable defaults avoided? Are return values checked?
- Style: does the code follow the project's conventions? Flag inconsistent naming, overly long functions, and missing docstrings on public APIs.
For each issue, record:
- File and line number(s)
- Issue category (correctness / error-handling / data-flow / style)
- Severity: [BLOCKING] or [ADVISORY]
- A one-sentence description of the problem
- A concrete suggested fix
Summarize the review with a pass/fail verdict and a count of blocking issues.

Output Format

## Code Review: <description of change>

### Issues Found

**[BLOCKING] File.py:42 — Correctness**
Problem: The condition `if x = None` assigns rather than compares.
Fix: Change to `if x is None`.

**[ADVISORY] utils.py:17 — Style**
Problem: Function `process_data` has no docstring.
Fix: Add a one-line docstring describing its purpose and return type.

### Summary
Verdict: NEEDS CHANGES
Blocking issues: 1
Advisory issues: 1

Quality Rules

Never omit the "Fix" for any reported issue.
If the diff is clean, report "No issues found. Approved." rather than inventing problems.
Do not comment on lines that are unchanged context lines in the diff.
Focus on the diff; do not audit the entire codebase unless asked.

Plus depuis ce dépôt

même dépôt

agent33-design

mattmre/AGENT33-PUBLIC

Use this skill to generate well-branded interfaces and assets for AGENT-33, either for production or throwaway prototypes/mocks/etc. Contains essential design guidelines, colors, type, fonts, assets, and UI kit components for prototyping.

2026-05-212

check-security

mattmre/AGENT33-PUBLIC

Scan code for security vulnerabilities and unsafe patterns with remediation guidance.

2026-05-212

suggest-improvements

mattmre/AGENT33-PUBLIC

Propose targeted refactoring and readability improvements for reviewed code.

2026-05-212

explain-error

mattmre/AGENT33-PUBLIC

Diagnose and explain error messages with root cause analysis and actionable fix steps.

2026-05-212

git-workflow

mattmre/AGENT33-PUBLIC

Assist with common git operations including branching, committing, and pull requests.

2026-05-212

lint-code

mattmre/AGENT33-PUBLIC

Lint source code using project-configured linters and auto-fix safe violations.

2026-05-212

Review Diff

Given a code diff (unified diff format or a PR description with changed files), perform a thorough code review covering correctness, logic, and style.

Procedure

Obtain the diff. If a file path is provided, read it with file_ops. If a git ref is given, run git diff <ref> via shell.

Parse the diff into changed hunks grouped by file.

For each changed file, review:

Correctness: does the logic implement the intended behavior? Look for off-by-one errors, incorrect conditionals, missing edge case handling.
Error handling: are errors caught and handled appropriately? Check for bare except clauses, swallowed exceptions, missing null checks.
Data flow: are variables initialized before use? Are mutable defaults avoided? Are return values checked?
Style: does the code follow the project's conventions? Flag inconsistent naming, overly long functions, and missing docstrings on public APIs.

For each issue, record:

File and line number(s)
Issue category (correctness / error-handling / data-flow / style)
Severity: [BLOCKING] or [ADVISORY]
A one-sentence description of the problem
A concrete suggested fix

Summarize the review with a pass/fail verdict and a count of blocking issues.

Output Format

## Code Review: <description of change> ### Issues Found **[BLOCKING] File.py:42 — Correctness** Problem: The condition `if x = None` assigns rather than compares. Fix: Change to `if x is None`. **[ADVISORY] utils.py:17 — Style** Problem: Function `process_data` has no docstring. Fix: Add a one-line docstring describing its purpose and return type. ### Summary Verdict: NEEDS CHANGES Blocking issues: 1 Advisory issues: 1

Quality Rules

Never omit the "Fix" for any reported issue.

If the diff is clean, report "No issues found. Approved." rather than inventing problems.

Do not comment on lines that are unchanged context lines in the diff.

Focus on the diff; do not audit the entire codebase unless asked.