deep-code-quality-review

Estrelas11

Forks0

Atualizado29 de maio de 2026 às 18:59

Strict maintainability review: abstraction quality, file size, spaghetti growth, code-judo simplification. Trigger: 'deep quality review', 'thermo-nuclear review', 'harsh maintainability audit'.

Instalação

Instalar com Codex ou Claude Copie este prompt, cole no Codex, Claude ou outro assistente e deixe que ele revise a página da skill e instale para você.

Fonte

aryaminus

aryaminus/controlkeel

Abrir repositório GitHub Ver repositórios do creator

Download

Ocupações relacionadasSOC

Baseado na classificação ocupacional SOC

Analistas de garantia de qualidade de software e testadoresInformática e Matemática·SOC 15-1253

Explorador de arquivos

2 arquivos

SKILL.md

readonly

name	deep-code-quality-review
description	Strict maintainability review: abstraction quality, file size, spaghetti growth, code-judo simplification. Trigger: 'deep quality review', 'thermo-nuclear review', 'harsh maintainability audit'.
when_to_use	Activate ONLY when explicitly asked for a harsh code quality review. Do NOT auto-trigger during normal coding or security reviews.
argument-hint	[file, PR, branch, or area]
disable-model-invocation	true
license	Apache-2.0
compatibility	["opencode-native","claude-standalone","cursor-native","codex"]
metadata	{"author":"controlkeel","version":"1.1","category":"quality","ck_mcp_tools":["ck_validate","ck_finding","ck_git_diff","ck_review_submit"],"related_skills":["security-review","parallel-review"]}

Deep Code Quality Review

Extremely strict maintainability review. Be ambitious about structure — search for "code judo" moves that make the implementation dramatically simpler.

Do NOT use when

Security review needed (use security-review)
Normal code review or PR feedback
Making behavior changes

Standards (non-negotiable)

File size: Flag files crossing 1000 lines → ck_finding rule code_quality.file_size (severity high).
No spaghetti: Flag ad-hoc conditionals in unrelated flows → rule code_quality.spaghetti_condition.
Design over "it works": If structure can be cleaner with same behavior, push for cleaner.
Direct over magical: Flag thin wrappers, identity functions, pass-through helpers → rule code_quality.unnecessary_abstraction.
Type boundaries: Flag unnecessary casts, optionality, ad-hoc shapes → rule code_quality.type_boundary.
Canonical layer: Flag feature logic in shared paths → rule code_quality.wrong_layer.
Orchestration: Flag sequential when parallel is simpler → rule code_quality.orchestration.

Additional rules: code_quality.missing_abstraction, code_quality.magic_handling, code_quality.duplicate_logic.

Workflow

Run ck_git_diff to get changes. Run ck_validate for automated patterns.
Walk quality checklist against every meaningful change.
Record each issue with ck_finding using the rule IDs above.
Submit findings via ck_review_submit (review_type: plan). Wait for approval.

Approval bar

No approval unless: no structural regression, no missed simplification, no file explosion, no spaghetti growth, no unnecessary abstraction, no layer leak, no missed decomposition.

Relationship to security-review

security-review: OWASP, injection, auth, secrets, dependencies
this skill: abstraction quality, file size, spaghetti, layering, simplification
Use parallel-review to run both concurrently.

Output

ck_finding records with specific rule IDs
ck_review_submit plan with prioritized findings
No code changes — review only

Mais deste repositório

mesmo repositório

bounded-loop

aryaminus/controlkeel

Run objective, repeatable improvement work under an immutable verifier and hard iteration, cost, time, and no-progress limits. Use for approved experiments with an automated metric and sandboxed worker.

2026-07-1711

communication-style

aryaminus/controlkeel

Write concise, calm technical responses whose structure matches the decision, evidence, or sequence being communicated. Use when drafting substantial plans, reviews, findings, documentation, or completion summaries.

2026-07-1711

controlkeel-governance

aryaminus/controlkeel

Operate inside a ControlKeel-governed session. Use this before code edits, shell execution, delegation, deploy work, or any task that needs CK validation, findings, budget, proof, or routing context.

2026-07-1711

cost-optimization

aryaminus/controlkeel

Keep a governed session within budget. Use this before long-running agent work, bulk processing, or any task where spend pressure could change the plan.

2026-07-1711

end-of-shift

aryaminus/controlkeel

Close a governed work session with validation, proof, findings, budget, digest, learning, and handoff checks. Use when the user asks to wrap up, stop for the day, or leave work ready for another agent.

2026-07-1711

false-confidence-test-audit

aryaminus/controlkeel

Audit tests that may pass without proving the claimed behavior. Use for periodic test-quality reviews or when coverage looks healthy but regressions still escape.

2026-07-1711

name	deep-code-quality-review
description	Strict maintainability review: abstraction quality, file size, spaghetti growth, code-judo simplification. Trigger: 'deep quality review', 'thermo-nuclear review', 'harsh maintainability audit'.
when_to_use	Activate ONLY when explicitly asked for a harsh code quality review. Do NOT auto-trigger during normal coding or security reviews.
argument-hint	[file, PR, branch, or area]
disable-model-invocation	true
license	Apache-2.0
compatibility	["opencode-native","claude-standalone","cursor-native","codex"]
metadata	{"author":"controlkeel","version":"1.1","category":"quality","ck_mcp_tools":["ck_validate","ck_finding","ck_git_diff","ck_review_submit"],"related_skills":["security-review","parallel-review"]}

Deep Code Quality Review

Extremely strict maintainability review. Be ambitious about structure — search for "code judo" moves that make the implementation dramatically simpler.

Do NOT use when

Security review needed (use security-review)
Normal code review or PR feedback
Making behavior changes

Standards (non-negotiable)

File size: Flag files crossing 1000 lines → ck_finding rule code_quality.file_size (severity high).
No spaghetti: Flag ad-hoc conditionals in unrelated flows → rule code_quality.spaghetti_condition.
Design over "it works": If structure can be cleaner with same behavior, push for cleaner.
Direct over magical: Flag thin wrappers, identity functions, pass-through helpers → rule code_quality.unnecessary_abstraction.
Type boundaries: Flag unnecessary casts, optionality, ad-hoc shapes → rule code_quality.type_boundary.
Canonical layer: Flag feature logic in shared paths → rule code_quality.wrong_layer.
Orchestration: Flag sequential when parallel is simpler → rule code_quality.orchestration.

Additional rules: code_quality.missing_abstraction, code_quality.magic_handling, code_quality.duplicate_logic.

Workflow

Run ck_git_diff to get changes. Run ck_validate for automated patterns.
Walk quality checklist against every meaningful change.
Record each issue with ck_finding using the rule IDs above.
Submit findings via ck_review_submit (review_type: plan). Wait for approval.

Approval bar

No approval unless: no structural regression, no missed simplification, no file explosion, no spaghetti growth, no unnecessary abstraction, no layer leak, no missed decomposition.

Relationship to security-review

security-review: OWASP, injection, auth, secrets, dependencies
this skill: abstraction quality, file size, spaghetti, layering, simplification
Use parallel-review to run both concurrently.

Output

ck_finding records with specific rule IDs
ck_review_submit plan with prioritized findings
No code changes — review only