- name
- code-review
- description
- Structured CRITICAL→NIT review for diffs or paths; review-only until the user requests code changes.
- origin
- adapted-from-ecc
# Skill: code-review
## When to use
The user wants feedback on a branch, diff, or set of files **without** automatic edits.
## Rules
- **Do not** apply patches or refactors unless the user explicitly asks to fix issues.
- Prefer reading the supplied diff or paths from disk over guessing.
## Output
1. Short **summary** of intent and risk.
2. Findings grouped as:
- **CRITICAL** — correctness, security, data loss, broken auth, server/client leaks.
- **MAJOR** — maintainability, missing tests for risky logic, observable UX bugs.
- **MINOR** — clarity, naming, small duplication.
- **NIT** — style preferences, optional polish.
3. Each item: **file** (and symbol or line hint), **issue**, **why it matters**, **suggestion**.
## Alignment with Cursor rules
Mirror the expectations in **`.cursor/rules/code-review-agent.mdc`** (attach or read that file when using Cursor).
## Codex note
Invoke as **`$code-review`** with diff or paths. If `.mdc` rules are not loaded, paste or `@` include **`code-review-agent.mdc`** content at session start.
GitHubで見る