菜单
Structured code review for bugs, regressions, tests, and standards. Use before PRs or when asked to review code. Use when the user asks to apply this review's findings locally. Not for resolving feedback already left on a PR; that is ce-resolve-pr-feedback.
默认使用会先检查来源的 Prompt；你也可以切换为直接命令，或下载本地副本。
决定是否安装前，请先阅读 SKILL.md，以及 SkillsMP 当前展示的配套文件。
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt，粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里，让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
直接命令不会经过审查 Prompt；运行前请先检查来源。
npx skills add https://github.com/EveryInc/compound-engineering-plugin --skill ce-code-review命令会保持在同一行。复制前请横向滚动并检查完整内容。
想先保存到本地？可下载 SkillsMP 当前能够提供的文件。
Diagnosis loop for bugs and failing behavior. Use when asked to debug or fix failing behavior.
Resolve PR review feedback. Use when addressing feedback already left on a PR. Not for reviewing the code before feedback exists; that is ce-code-review.
Execute a plan or concrete work prompt end-to-end. Use when implementing from a plan document, a spec path, or a clear build request; use ce-debug for open-ended bugs. Use when an outer orchestrator needs implementation and local verification only, without the shipping tail.
正在显示 SKILL.md
| name | ce-code-review |
| description | Structured code review for bugs, regressions, tests, and standards. Use before PRs or when asked to review code. Use when the user asks to apply this review's findings locally. Not for resolving feedback already left on a PR; that is ce-resolve-pr-feedback. |
| argument-hint | [mode:agent] [apply:local] [blank to review current branch, or provide PR link] |
Resolve the CE artifact root <root> before composing any artifact path.
docs_root from <repo-root>/.compound-engineering/config.yaml only (<repo-root> = git rev-parse --show-toplevel). Do not read it from config.local.yaml. Unset -> <root> is docs, exactly as before..git/. Otherwise stop with an error naming docs_root and the value -- never fall back to docs.<root> as the sole artifact location: create it if absent, compose each path as <root>/<subdir> with this skill's own subdirectory, and never also read docs.Follow these steps in order; the references supply the detail but never change the order. Each reference named below is a required read for its step: load it before doing that step's work.
references/modes-and-output.md first. It settles what the arguments mean, which argument conflicts stop the run before any reviewer is dispatched, whether the quick-review short-circuit applies, and what this invocation returns.references/scope.md and resolve the reviewed diff, the scope mode, and the deterministic scope signals.references/intent-and-plan.md, write the intent summary every reviewer receives, and discover the plan Stage 6 verifies requirements against.references/persona-catalog.md and references/select-and-route.md, then select the risk-driven reviewer roster, discover applicable standards paths, and bind the adversarial route.references/cross-model-review.md defines, before any local persona dispatch. Invoking this skill is itself the authorization for its configured or allowlisted peer route, once you have made the required disclosure of the recipient and of the code that leaves the machine. Do not ask the user to confirm a second time, and do not skip the peer because the user did not repeat that authorization. An explicit user prohibition on external review overrides it, as does a checkout that sets cross_model_review_mode: off with no live opt-in; both are resolved before you bind a route. This pass's skip and target-selection keys are cross_model_review_mode and cross_model_peer. Missing files or unset keys take the default auto route; they are not a skip. Another skill's engine preference is not this gate. Model and effort overrides stay with the bound target as the reference states. A started peer replaces the local adversarial persona at this stage, and only a real failure to scope, allowlist, reach, authenticate, or start it leaves the local fallback in the roster; a later stage may still restore the local reviewer under the conditions that reference states.references/dispatch-reviewers.md. Dispatch the materialized local roster as one foreground concurrent batch sized to the host's active-agent cap. Every successful launch is collected when its terminal outcome is in hand: consume valid compact returns, classify a terminal tool error or malformed output as a failed reviewer, and keep launch receipts uncollected. Use the host's blocking collection capability for asynchronous receipts, and do not synthesize until every successful launch is collected. If launched work cannot be collected reliably, stop it, discharge any persisted peer through its owning cleanup before returning the failure result, and never emit progress or wait for a notification. Detaching local review into a polled background job is forbidden. The cross-model peer is the only detached work, and it may overlap this batch.references/finish-review.md. Fold in the peer once, run the documented findings mechanics, and run every validator the reference selects; only then return the report. Never synthesize directly from raw reviewer artifacts. In the multi-agent path, emit only this skill's report: do not also invoke a harness-native findings or reporting tool, which belongs to the quick-review short-circuit alone.ce-code-review invocation produces findings and does not apply them. Entering the apply stage requires apply:local, or an explicit user request in the invoking prompt to apply or fix this review's findings; a deprecated mode:autofix token is neither. mode:agent never mutates the tree, even when nested inside a workflow that later applies findings. Never push, open PRs, or file tickets in any mode.AskUserQuestion, request_user_input, ask_user, or other blocking question tools. Infer intent, plan, and scope from explicit tokens, git state, PR metadata, and conversation. Note uncertainty in Coverage or the verdict — do not stop to ask.gh pr checkout, git checkout, git switch, or similar branch-switch commands. Passing a PR number, URL, or branch name selects review scope, not permission to mutate the working tree. Uncommitted work can only be reviewed from the checkout that holds it, so to review it on a feature branch, stay on that branch (or check it out yourself) and pass base: or no target.For the multi-agent path, once the review scope is resolved, use the platform's task-tracking capability when available to show a short user-facing view derived from the execution spine. Track review outcomes, not individual personas, setup mechanics, or tool calls; add conditional work only when its gate fires, and update the view at meaningful transitions. If no task-tracking capability is available, continue with the normal progress and final report without simulating a task list in chat.