code-review

name	code-review
description	Review code for bugs, security issues, performance problems, and style violations. Use when the user asks for a code review, submits code for feedback, or wants to improve code quality.
metadata	{"author":"symphony","version":"1.0"}

Code Review

When to use this skill

Activate this skill when the user:

• Asks for a review of their code
• Submits a pull request or diff for feedback
• Wants to improve existing code quality
• Asks about best practices for specific code

Review checklist

Work through each category systematically:

1. Correctness

• Does the code handle all expected inputs?
• Are edge cases covered (empty inputs, nulls, boundaries)?
• Are error conditions handled appropriately?
• Do loops terminate correctly?

2. Security

• Are user inputs validated and sanitized?
• Are SQL queries parameterized (no string interpolation)?
• Are secrets hardcoded? (flag immediately)
• Is authentication/authorization checked where needed?
• Are there potential injection vectors (SQL, XSS, command)?

3. Performance

• Are there unnecessary loops or redundant computations?
• Could any O(n^2) operations be optimized?
• Are database queries efficient (N+1 problems, missing indexes)?
• Is there unnecessary memory allocation?

4. Readability

• Are variable/function names descriptive?
• Is the code structure logical and well-organized?
• Are complex algorithms commented?
• Does the code follow the project's conventions?

5. Maintainability

• Is the code DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself)?
• Are functions/methods appropriately sized?
• Is there proper separation of concerns?
• Are there adequate tests for the changes?

Output format

Structure your review as:

## Code Review Summary

**Overall**: [Brief assessment — e.g., "Good with minor issues"]

### Critical Issues
- [Issue]: [explanation + fix]

### Suggestions
- [Suggestion]: [explanation + example]

### Positive Notes
- [What's done well]

Severity levels

• Critical: Bugs, security vulnerabilities, data loss risks — must fix
• Warning: Performance issues, missing error handling — should fix
• Suggestion: Style improvements, refactoring ideas — nice to have
• Note: Observations, questions, alternative approaches — informational