Menu
Reviews code for bugs, style, and best practices. Use when reviewing PRs or checking code quality.
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.
Baseado na classificação ocupacional SOC
Extract creative intent from images into executable build specs. Activates on images + build intent, "image to mission", "i2m", or capturing visual energy in code/design.
Unit Circle Laboratory + sc-dev-team autonomous mission control. Provides human-in-the-loop automation layer, pipeline management, context lifecycle, stuck-state prevention. UC re-execution series and dev branch milestones. Adapted from uc-lab pattern for code plan/execute/verify/complete. Auto-activates during UC milestone work; trigger: user says 'bring up the dev team'.
Generate intelligence briefings for the planning dashboard. Use this skill whenever a request file appears in `.planning/console/inbox/pending/` whose `type` field starts with `intelligence.` (refresh_briefing, triage_finding, snapshot_diff, investigate_section, dismiss_finding). The skill reads the per-project KB at `.gsd/intelligence/intelligence.db`, synthesizes a briefing with a causal hypothesis + acknowledged uncertainty + confidence label and ranked moves, then writes the result back to the KB. Always trigger this skill for these request types — do not generate briefings manually.
Sketched Isotropic Gaussian Regularization primitive. Scalar loss matching the embedding distribution to a standard-normal target via Cramér-Wold slicing and the Epps-Pulley empirical characteristic function test. Port of rbalestr-lab/lejepa (MIT). Default-off in v1.49.571.
Adversarial spec-compliance PR review — cross-references diffs against approved specs, verifies runtime claims against source, detects competing PRs, audits scope/convention compliance. Use before merging.
Pick among candidate outputs (code, configs, plans) by running them on diverse inputs and clustering by behavioural fingerprint, rather than by textual aggregation or log-probability. Activates when an executor returns multiple plausible candidates that need disambiguation, when output-majority voting would be the default choice, or when reviewing generated code that has not yet been validated. The 2026 evidence (Semantic Voting, arxiv 2605.08680v1) is that any execution-based selector dominates output-majority voting by 19-52pp; sketch-generated inputs beat random fuzz by 11.3pp. Triggers: "pick the best candidate", "majority vote on code", "select from N samples", "validate the generated output", "behavioural verification".
| name | code-review |
| description | Reviews code for bugs, style, and best practices. Use when reviewing PRs or checking code quality. |
| version | 1.0.0 |
| format | "2025-10-02T00:00:00.000Z" |
| triggers | ["reviewing PRs or checking code quality"] |
| updated | "2026-04-25T00:00:00.000Z" |
| status | ACTIVE |
Correctness: Logic errors, edge cases, off-by-one, resource leaks, race conditions, error handling
Security: Input validation, injection (SQL/XSS), auth/authz, secrets exposure, CSRF
Performance: N+1 queries, redundant work, memory leaks, blocking I/O, missing indexes
Maintainability: Clear naming, single responsibility, DRY, test coverage
| Level | Action |
|---|---|
| CRITICAL | Security/data-loss risk — must fix |
| MAJOR | Bug/performance — should fix |
| MINOR | Code smell — consider fixing |
| STYLE | Formatting — optional |
### [SEVERITY] Brief description
**File:** path:line
**Issue:** What's wrong
**Suggestion:** Proposed fix
== true/false → use boolean directlycatch(e) {} → swallowed error