菜单
Guide for making code reviews. Use this when asked to make code reviews, or ask to use it before committing changes.
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/maragudk/fabrik --skill 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。
正在显示 SKILL.md
Guide for using git with specific preferences -- backticks around code identifiers in commit messages, asking about GitHub issues to reference before committing. Use this whenever you commit, write a commit message, or work with pull requests -- not just when explicitly asked to "commit". These conventions aren't in your default knowledge and you'll get them wrong without consulting this skill.
Comprehensively reviews SwiftUI code for best practices on modern APIs, maintainability, and performance. Use when reading, writing, or reviewing SwiftUI projects.
Design and build native-feeling macOS application UIs. Use this skill whenever the user asks to create a desktop app, macOS app, Mac-style interface, Apple-style UI, system utility, or anything that should look and feel like a native Mac application. Also trigger when users mention "native feel", "desktop app design", "Apple design patterns", "sidebar layout", "traffic lights", or want to build tools/utilities that feel like they belong on macOS. This skill covers layout, composition, interaction patterns, animations, light/dark mode, and all the subtle details that make an app feel like Apple built it.
| name | code-review |
| description | Guide for making code reviews. Use this when asked to make code reviews, or ask to use it before committing changes. |
| license | MIT |
Always start by inspecting the changes. If you're on the main git branch, typically the (staged) git diff. If you're on a different branch, the committed and uncommitted changes compared to the main branch.
Please dispatch two subagents to carefully review the code changes. Tell them that they're competing with another agent. Make sure they look at both architecture and implementation. Tell them that whoever finds more issues wins honour and glory.
Also have them run one targeted check on comments: read each new or changed comment as a reader who knows only this package and the public API of what it imports. Flag any mention of callers or importing packages, and any reference to internals hidden behind an abstraction the code consumes. Such context leakage is a real defect, not a comment nitpick -- surface it even when only one reviewer finds it.
Run a second targeted check on constants: flag any new package-level constant (or variable) that is used in only one place, or only within a single function. The fix is to inline the value at its use site, until a constant is genuinely needed -- reuse across functions, or a name that adds real meaning the literal lacks. Surface this even when only one reviewer finds it.
Signal-to-noise ratio matters more than completeness. When reporting back to the caller:
State clearly in the report which issues had consensus and which are single-reviewer calls promoted for seriousness.