with one click
review-code
// Code review of current git changes with an expert senior-engineer lens. Detects SOLID violations, security risks, and proposes actionable improvements. Use when performing code reviews.
// Code review of current git changes with an expert senior-engineer lens. Detects SOLID violations, security risks, and proposes actionable improvements. Use when performing code reviews.
Review design, implementation, and task documents produced by design. Evaluates document quality, internal consistency, and technical soundness. Use after design completes and before starting implement.
Code review of current git changes with an expert senior-engineer lens. Detects SOLID violations, security risks, and proposes actionable improvements. Use when performing code reviews.
Review design, implementation, and task documents produced by design. Evaluates document quality, internal consistency, and technical soundness. Use after design completes and before starting implement.
TRIGGER when: user asks to implement, fix, build, or work on something — whether from a docs/wip plan OR a standalone task (bug fix, GitHub issue, one-off change). Examples: "work on task 1", "fix this bug", "implement feature X from the issue". Provides structured execution with profile detection, dependency handling, review checkpoints.
TRIGGER when: user asks to implement, fix, build, or work on something — whether from a docs/wip plan OR a standalone task (bug fix, GitHub issue, one-off change). Examples: "work on task 1", "fix this bug", "implement feature X from the issue". Provides structured execution with profile detection, dependency handling, review checkpoints.
After implementing a new feature or fixing a bug, make sure to document the changes. Use when writing documentation, after finishing the implementation phase for a feature or a bug-fix.
| name | review-code |
| description | Code review of current git changes with an expert senior-engineer lens. Detects SOLID violations, security risks, and proposes actionable improvements. Use when performing code reviews. |
Perform a structured review of the current git changes with focus on SOLID, architecture, removal candidates, and security risks. Default to review-only output unless the user asks to implement changes.
Read capy knowledge base conventions at shared-capy-knowledge-protocol.md.
Profile detection — the set of reference checklists loaded for a given diff — is delegated to the shared procedure at shared-profile-detection.md. The workflow below invokes it in Step 2 and uses the resulting (profile, checklist) list to drive Steps 3–4.
Before declaring the review complete, verify all outputs are delivered:
kk:review-findings (skip if no qualifying findings)Indexing is owned by this skill — callers (e.g., /kk:implement) do NOT duplicate it.
/kk:review-code)Reviews code in the main conversation context. Fast, single-pass review using the workflow below.
/kk:review-code:isolated)Delegates detection to independent reviewers that did not write the code, then annotates their findings with author context. Two parallel reviewers: a code-reviewer sub-agent and pal codereview (external model in native format). Produces a report organized by agreement level with corroborated findings highlighted.
See review-isolated.md for the isolated workflow.
| Level | Name | Description | Action |
|---|---|---|---|
| P0 | Critical | Security vulnerability, data loss risk, correctness bug | Must block merge |
| P1 | High | Logic error, significant SOLID violation, performance regression | Should fix before merge |
| P2 | Medium | Code smell, maintainability concern, minor SOLID violation | Fix in this PR or create follow-up |
| P3 | Low | Style, naming, minor suggestion | Optional improvement |
The workflow below is strictly sequential. Do not read the diff's contents, re-read changed files, run capy_search, or begin forming findings until you have completed profile detection and loaded every resolved checklist file. Until then, your only contact with the changes is git diff --stat (filenames only) — enough to drive profile detection, but not enough to pattern-match findings.
This ordering is load-bearing, not stylistic. Reviewing from a diff before loading profile checklists is the known failure mode this skill is designed to prevent: the LLM has enough from the diff to produce plausible findings, and optimizes away the methodology if the workflow permits.
Phases (summary — the detailed procedure in review-process.md breaks presentation into three distinct numbered steps: present results, next-steps confirmation, verify outputs):
git diff --stat for filenames only (no content reads)shared-profile-detection.md; produce the list of (profile, checklist) recordsreview-code/index.md; collect always-load + filename-evaluable conditionals now; defer content-evaluable conditionals to Step 6(profile, checklist) file collected in Step 3 into contextcapy_search for kk:review-findings and kk:lang-idioms(profile, checklist)kk:review-findingsSee review-process.md for the detailed step-by-step process.
Standard mode:
/kk:review-code
Isolated mode with independent sub-agents:
/kk:review-code:isolated