메뉴
Systematically evaluate code changes for security, correctness, performance, and spec alignment. Use when reviewing PRs, assessing code quality, or verifying implementation against requirements.
기본적으로 소스를 먼저 확인하는 Prompt가 선택됩니다. 직접 명령으로 전환하거나 로컬 사본을 다운로드할 수도 있습니다.
설치 여부를 결정하기 전에 SKILL.md와 SkillsMP에 표시된 보조 파일을 읽어 보세요.
SOC 직업 분류 기준
Codex 또는 Claude로 설치 이 Prompt를 복사해 Codex, Claude 또는 다른 어시스턴트에 붙여 넣으면 Skill 페이지를 검토하고 설치를 진행할 수 있습니다.
직접 명령은 검토 Prompt를 거치지 않습니다. 실행하기 전에 소스를 확인하세요.
npx skills add https://github.com/CaptainCrouton89/.claude --skill reviewing-code명령은 한 줄로 유지됩니다. 복사하기 전에 가로로 스크롤해 전체 내용을 확인하세요.
로컬 사본을 원하시나요? SkillsMP에서 현재 제공할 수 있는 파일을 다운로드하세요.
SKILL.md 표시 중
Defines required structure, frontmatter format, and best practices for SKILL.md files. Use BEFORE creating or editing any skill - this is the spec to follow, not optional reference.
Diagnose and fix bugs through systematic investigation, root cause analysis, and targeted validation. Use when something is broken, errors occur, performance degrades, or unexpected behavior manifests.
Maintain project documentation synchronized with code. Keep feature specs, API contracts, and README current with init-project standards. Use when updating docs after code changes, adding new features, or ensuring documentation completeness.
| name | Reviewing Code |
| description | Systematically evaluate code changes for security, correctness, performance, and spec alignment. Use when reviewing PRs, assessing code quality, or verifying implementation against requirements. |
Evaluate code changes across security, correctness, spec alignment, performance, and maintainability. Apply sequential or parallel review based on scope.
Sequential (small PRs, <5 files):
Parallel (large PRs, >5 files):
Read documentation:
docs/feature-spec/F-##-*.md — Technical design and requirementsdocs/user-stories/US-###-*.md — Acceptance criteriadocs/api-contracts.yaml — Expected API signaturesdocs/data-plan.md — Event tracking requirements (if applicable)docs/design-spec.md — UI/UX requirements (if applicable)docs/system-design.md — Architecture patterns (if available)docs/plans/<slug>/plan.md — Original implementation plan (if available)Determine scope:
Security (/25)
Correctness (/25)
Spec Alignment (/20)
docs/api-contracts.yamldocs/data-plan.mddocs/design-spec.mdPerformance (/15)
Maintainability (/15)
Total: /100
Format:
Location: file.ts:123
Problem: [Description]
Impact: [Risk/consequence]
Fix: [Specific change needed]
Spec reference: [docs/api-contracts.yaml line X]
Highlight what was done well for learning
Best for <5 files, single concern:
Best for >5 files, multiple concerns:
Spawn specialized agents:
senior-engineer for vulnerability assessmentExplore for pattern complianceprogrammer for endpoint validationprogrammer for UI/UX and accessibilitydocumentor for comment quality and docsEach agent reviews specific quality dimension
Consolidate findings into single report
# Code Review: [Feature/PR]
## Summary
**Quality Score:** [X/100]
**Issues:** Critical: [N], Important: [N], Nice-to-have: [N]
**Assessment:** [APPROVE / NEEDS REVISION / MAJOR REWORK]
## Spec Compliance
- [ ] APIs match `docs/api-contracts.yaml`
- [ ] Events match `docs/data-plan.md`
- [ ] UI matches `docs/design-spec.md`
- [ ] Logic satisfies story AC
## Findings
### Critical Issues
[Issues with fix recommendations]
### Important Issues
[Issues that should be addressed]
### Nice-to-Have Suggestions
[Optional improvements]
### Good Practices
[What worked well]
## Recommendations
[Next steps: approval, revision needed, etc.]
Offer options:
Parallel fixes for large revisions:
Document format:
✅ FIXED: [Issue name]
File: [path:line]
Change: [what changed]
Verification: [how to test]
Check if specs need updates:
Always flag for user approval before modifying specs.