メニュー
Shared /code-review finder-angle block covering line-by-line diff scanning, removed-behavior auditing, and cross-file tracing
デフォルトでは、最初にソースを確認する Prompt が選択されています。直接コマンドに切り替えるか、ローカルコピーをダウンロードすることもできます。
インストールを決める前に、SKILL.md と SkillsMP に表示されている付属ファイルをお読みください。
SOC 職業分類に基づく
Codex または Claude でインストール この Prompt をコピーして Codex、Claude、または他のアシスタントに貼り付けると、Skill ページを確認してインストールできます。
直接コマンドでは確認用 Prompt が省略されます。実行前にソースを確認してください。
npx skills add https://github.com/mkusaka/ccskills --skill code-review-correctness-finder-anglesコマンドは1行のまま表示されます。コピー前に横へスクロールして全体を確認してください。
ローカルで確認しますか？SkillsMP が現在取得できるファイルをダウンロードできます。
SKILL.md を表示中
Reference guide covering decision heuristics for building agents on the Claude API, including tool surface design, context management, caching strategies, and composing tool calls
Step-by-step migration guide for upgrading Python projects from the Anthropic SDK 0.x to 1.x, covering Python and dependency requirements, httpx2, removed APIs and parameters, response handling, testing, and verification
Catalogs reusable Artifact components and supplies the exact scripts, styles, tokens, markup contract, and composition limits for embedding interactive decision blocks
| name | code-review-correctness-finder-angles |
| description | Shared /code-review finder-angle block covering line-by-line diff scanning, removed-behavior auditing, and cross-file tracing |
| metadata | {"originalName":"Skill: Code Review correctness finder angles","ccVersion":"2.1.206","sourceUrl":"https://github.com/Piebald-AI/claude-code-system-prompts/blob/main/system-prompts/skill-code-review-correctness-finder-angles.md","source":{"owner":"Piebald-AI","repo":"claude-code-system-prompts","ref":"main","path":"system-prompts/skill-code-review-correctness-finder-angles.md"}} |
Read every hunk in the diff, line by line. Then Read the enclosing function for
each hunk — bugs in unchanged lines of a touched function are in scope (the PR
re-exposes or fails to fix them). For every line ask: what input, state, timing,
or platform makes this line wrong? Look for inverted/wrong conditions,
off-by-one, null/undefined deref, missing await, falsy-zero checks,
wrong-variable copy-paste, error swallowed in catch, unescaped regex metachars.
For every line the diff DELETES or replaces, name the invariant or behavior it enforced, then search the new code for where that invariant is re-established. If you can't find it, that's a candidate: a removed guard, a dropped error path, a narrowed validation, a deleted test that was covering a real case.
For each function the diff changes, find its callers (Grep for the symbol) and check whether the change breaks any call site: a new precondition, a changed return shape, a new exception, a timing/ordering dependency. Also check callees: does a parallel change in the same PR make a call unsafe?