// Trigger when the user requests a review of frontend files (e.g., `.tsx`, `.ts`, `.js`). Support both pending-change reviews and focused file reviews while applying the checklist rules.
| name | frontend-code-review |
| description | Trigger when the user requests a review of frontend files (e.g., `.tsx`, `.ts`, `.js`). Support both pending-change reviews and focused file reviews while applying the checklist rules. |
Use this skill whenever the user asks to review frontend code (especially .tsx, .ts, or .js files). Support two review modes:
Stick to the checklist below for every applicable file and mode.
See references/code-quality.md, references/performance.md, for the living checklist split by category—treat it as the canonical set of rules to follow.
Flag each rule violation with urgency metadata so future reviewers can prioritize fixes.
When invoked, the response must exactly follow one of the two templates:
# Code review
Found <N> urgent issues need to be fixed:
## 1 <brief description of bug>
FilePath: <path> line <line>
<relevant code snippet or pointer>
### Suggested fix
<brief description of suggested fix>
---
... (repeat for each urgent issue) ...
Found <M> suggestions for improvement:
## 1 <brief description of suggestion>
FilePath: <path> line <line>
<relevant code snippet or pointer>
### Suggested fix
<brief description of suggested fix>
---
... (repeat for each suggestion) ...
If there are no urgent issues, omit that section. If there are no suggestions, omit that section.
If the issue number is more than 10, summarize as "10+ urgent issues" or "10+ suggestions" and just output the first 10 issues.
Don't compress the blank lines between sections; keep them as-is for readability.
If you use Template A (i.e., there are issues to fix) and at least one issue requires code changes, append a brief follow-up question after the structured output asking whether the user wants you to apply the suggested fix(es). For example: "Would you like me to use the Suggested fix section to address these issues?"
## Code review
No issues found.
Guides creation of comprehensive Product Requirement Documents (PRDs) for software projects through structured questioning and validation, then generates implementation task lists in JSON format. Use when users want to document a software idea, create specifications for development, plan a new application feature/bug, or break down requirements into actionable tasks. Transforms ideas into implementation-ready documents with verifiable pass criteria.
Refactor high-complexity React components in frontend. Use when the user asks for code splitting, hook extraction, or complexity reduction, or when you come across a component that is too complex to understand and refactor it.
Playwright E2E testing patterns. Trigger: When writing Playwright E2E tests (Page Object Model, selectors, MCP exploration workflow).
Generate Vitest + React Testing Library tests for frontend components, hooks, and utilities. Triggers on testing, spec files, coverage, Vitest, RTL, unit tests, integration tests, or write/review test requests.
Guide for creating effective skills. This skill should be used when users want to create a new skill (or update an existing skill) that extends Claude's capabilities with specialized knowledge, workflows, or tool integrations.
Comprehensive vitest testing patterns covering test structure, AAA pattern, parameterized tests, assertions, mocking, test doubles, error handling, async testing, and performance optimization. Use when writing, reviewing, or refactoring vitest tests, or when user mentions vitest, testing, TDD, test coverage, mocking, assertions, or test files (*.test.ts, *.spec.ts).