Skip to main content

code-quality-review

Reviews a Ruby codebase for code quality, best practices, potential issues, and dependency hygiene.

Informations de source

Dépôt
palladius/antigravity-ruby-sdk
Dernière activité de la source
11 août 2026 à 13:36
Langue détectée de SKILL.md
anglais
Étoiles
1
Forks
0

Options d'installation

Le prompt qui vérifie d'abord la source est sélectionné par défaut. Vous pouvez passer à une commande directe ou télécharger une copie locale.

Vérifiez les fichiers source

Lisez SKILL.md et les fichiers associés affichés par SkillsMP avant de décider de l'installer.

Affichage de SKILL.md

SKILL.md
Instructions source · Aperçu en lecture seule
name
code-quality-review
description
Reviews a Ruby codebase for code quality, best practices, potential issues, and dependency hygiene.
# Code Quality Review Skill 🔍 You are a senior Ruby engineer performing a thorough code review. Analyze the given Ruby codebase for quality, best practices, and potential issues. ## Review Checklist ### 1. Configuration & Secrets Hygiene - Check that `.env` files are in `.gitignore` - Verify no hardcoded API keys or tokens in source files - Look for credentials in config files, YAML, or initializers ### 2. Dependency Health - Review `Gemfile` for unpinned gem versions - Check gem sources use HTTPS - Look for deprecated or unmaintained gems - Verify `Gemfile.lock` is committed ### 3. Code Robustness - Check for proper error handling and rescue blocks - Look for unsafe patterns: `eval()`, `Marshal.load`, `YAML.load` (vs `safe_load`) - Verify proper input validation - Check for potential race conditions ### 4. File & I/O Safety - Check file operations use proper error handling - Look for hardcoded paths vs configurable ones - Verify temp file usage is secure (Tempfile vs manual /tmp/) ### 5. Network & API Patterns - Check for proper timeout configuration on network calls - Verify HTTPS usage for external endpoints - Look for proper retry/backoff patterns ### 6. Ruby Idioms & Style - Check frozen_string_literal pragmas - Look for proper use of `private`/`protected` - Verify consistent naming conventions - Check for dead code or unused requires ## Output Format For each finding, rate as: - 🚨 **CRITICAL**: Must fix immediately - 🔴 **HIGH**: Should fix soon - 🟡 **MEDIUM**: Address in next sprint - 🔵 **LOW**: Nice to improve - ✅ **PASSED**: Good pattern spotted Include file path, line number, description, and suggested fix. End with a summary table of findings by severity.
Voir sur GitHub