メニュー
AI code reviewer grounded in classic software engineering books for catching design smells, coupling issues, and architectural risks.
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。
SOC 職業分類に基づく
This skill should be used for advanced LLM evaluation: LLM-as-judge systems, direct scoring, pairwise comparison, rubric calibration, evaluator bias mitigation, confidence scoring, and automated quality assessment.
Automated end-to-end UI testing and verification on an Android Emulator using ADB.
This skill should be used when modeling agent mental states with BDI concepts: beliefs, desires, intentions, RDF-to-belief transformations, rational agency traces, cognitive agents, BDI ontologies, and neuro-symbolic AI integration.
Build a premium cinematic landing page with mouse-scrub video hero and brand-driven narrative-arc sections. Use whenever the user provides a hero video plus a product / subject / brand and wants a landing page, promo site, product showcase, marketing page, or storytelling site. Works for any language and any subject. The signature effect is mouse-driven video scrubbing — the hero video lives across the entire page as a fixed backdrop, and moving the mouse left-right scrubs the video timeline so the subject responds to the cursor. Below the hero, 4-5 fully-opaque sections each carry their own brand identity (color, typography emphasis, layout pattern) and walk the viewer through a narrative arc (e.g. longing -> joy -> nostalgia -> contemplation -> action). Do NOT use for parallax frame-scrub landings where the page itself doesn't scroll (use parallax-landing-page instead) or for video editing / captioning workflows (use video-edit).
Convert frontend code (Vite, React, etc.) to a Stitch Design by chaining static HTML extraction, design system extraction, and file upload. **ALWAYS** use this skill when the user's intent is to move existing web apps or React components into Stitch (e.g., requests to "save", "migrate", or "upload"). You must use this skill even for simple "save" operations, as it is the only way to ensure the design system is extracted and assets are properly linked.
This skill should be used for diagnosing and mitigating context degradation: lost-in-middle failures, context poisoning, context clash, context confusion, attention-pattern issues, and agent performance degradation caused by accumulated or conflicting context.
| name | brooks-lint |
| description | AI code reviewer grounded in classic software engineering books for catching design smells, coupling issues, and architectural risks. |
| category | development |
| risk | safe |
| source | community |
| source_repo | hyhmrright/brooks-lint |
| source_type | community |
| license | MIT |
| license_source | https://github.com/hyhmrright/brooks-lint/blob/main/LICENSE |
| date_added | 2026-04-29 |
| author | hyhmrright |
| tags | ["code-review","architecture","software-design","refactoring","claude-code"] |
| tools | ["claude","codex","cursor","gemini"] |
Brooks Lint is a Claude Code skill that reviews your code through the lens of 12 classic software engineering books. Instead of checking style rules, it asks: "What would the authors of The Pragmatic Programmer, Clean Code, and Designing Data-Intensive Applications say about this code?"
It synthesizes the principles from landmark engineering books into actionable, structured feedback — catching design smells, tight coupling, missing abstractions, and architectural risks that linters and AI tools typically miss.
Named after Fred Brooks, author of The Mythical Man-Month — because the hardest bugs are conceptual, not syntactic.
| Book | Key Principles Applied |
|---|---|
| The Pragmatic Programmer | DRY, orthogonality, tracer bullets |
| Clean Code | Naming, function size, comment clarity |
| The Mythical Man-Month | Conceptual integrity, second-system effect |
| Designing Data-Intensive Applications | Data consistency, fault tolerance, scalability |
| A Philosophy of Software Design | Deep modules, information hiding, complexity |
| Refactoring | Code smells, extract method, encapsulation |
| Working Effectively with Legacy Code | Seams, characterization tests, dependency breaking |
| Domain-Driven Design | Ubiquitous language, bounded contexts, aggregates |
| Release It! | Stability patterns, timeouts, bulkheads, circuit breakers |
| Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs | Abstraction, recursion, metalinguistic abstraction |
| The Art of UNIX Programming | Modularity, composability, rule of least surprise |
| Extreme Programming Explained | YAGNI, simple design, collective ownership |
Brooks Lint applies each book's core principles as a review lens:
# Install via Claude Code plugin marketplace
# Search: "brooks-lint" in Claude Code > Extensions
# Or install via NPX (Antigravity)
npx antigravity-awesome-skills --claude
# Then invoke: @brooks-lint
@brooks-lint review src/services/PaymentService.ts
Brooks Lint output:
[Pragmatic Programmer] DRY violation: payment validation logic duplicated in 3 places
[Clean Code] Method processPayment() does 4 things — violates Single Responsibility
[Release It!] No timeout on external payment gateway call — risk of cascade failure
[DDIA] No idempotency key — retry on network error will double-charge
[APOSD] PaymentService knows too much about UserRepository — high coupling
@brooks-lint analyze the overall architecture of this codebase
@brooks-lint what are the biggest design smells in this module before I refactor it?
| Category | Books Applied | What It Catches |
|---|---|---|
| DRY / Duplication | PP, Refactoring | Copy-paste code, shared logic not extracted |
| Naming | Clean Code, DDD | Unclear names, domain language violations |
| Coupling | APOSD, PP | Tight dependencies, missing interfaces |
| Stability | Release It! | Missing timeouts, no retry logic, no circuit breakers |
| Data Integrity | DDIA | Race conditions, non-idempotent operations |
| Complexity | APOSD, SICP | Over-engineering, unnecessary abstraction |
| Legacy Debt | WELC | Hard-to-test code, missing seams |
| Domain Clarity | DDD, XP | Anemic models, missing bounded contexts |
@brooks-lint after writing new service layers or data pipelines@logic-lens for full coverage: logic bugs + design smells@brooks-lint analyze architecture weekly on growing codebases@logic-lens — Complementary: catches logic bugs; brooks-lint catches design issues@security-auditor — Specialized security-only deep scan@lint-and-validate — Style/syntax linting to run alongside design reviewUse this skill only when the task clearly matches the scope described above (design review and architectural analysis). Brooks Lint applies AI-powered analysis grounded in established engineering principles. It should complement — not replace — human design review for production-critical decisions. Results reflect the principles of the 12 source books and may not apply to all architectural styles or domains.