一键在 Manus 中运行任何 Skill

pr-review

星标7

分支2

更新时间2026年7月16日 08:36

Review a pull request and rate it /10 on bugs, security, improvements, technical quality, and consistency with adjacent code.

安装

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。

在 Manus 中运行

来源

pass-culture

pass-culture/data-gcp

打开 GitHub 仓库查看创作者相关仓库

下载

在 Manus 中运行

PR Review Skill

Context Gathering

Determine the main branch, then diff against it:
- MAIN=$(git remote show origin | sed -n '/HEAD branch/s/.*: //p')
- git fetch origin "$MAIN"
- git --no-pager diff "origin/$MAIN...HEAD"
Read adjacent code for each modified file.
Check for new/modified tests related to changes.
If dependency files changed (pyproject.toml, uv.lock, requirements.txt), use the validate_cves tool.

Evaluation Criteria

Hints below are additional focus areas — use your own judgment to evaluate thoroughly.

Bugs (weight: critical)
Security (weight: critical)
Tests & Reliability (weight: high)
Improvements (weight: medium) — simpler libraries, unnecessary complexity, performance.
Technical Quality (weight: medium) — AHA rule: only extract when used >3 times.
Consistency (weight: low) — match patterns/naming/style of surrounding code.

Severity Levels

🔴 Blocker: Must fix before merge.
🟠 Important: Should fix.
🟡 Minor: Nice to fix.

Scoring Rules

Any 🔴 → Overall capped at 5/10.
Any 🟠 → Overall capped at 7/10.
Bugs & Security count 2x in weighted average.

Output Format

## PR Review — <PR title>

| Criteria           | Status | Comments |
|--------------------|--------|----------|
| Bugs               | 🟢/🟡/🟠/🔴 |          |
| Security           | 🟢/🟡/🟠/🔴 |          |
| Tests & Reliability| 🟢/🟡/🟠/🔴 |          |
| Improvements       | 🟢/🟡/🟠/🔴 |          |
| Technical Quality  | 🟢/🟡/🟠/🔴 |          |
| Consistency        | 🟢/🟡/🟠/🔴 |          |

**Overall: X/10**

### 🔴 Blockers
### 🟠 Important
### 🟡 Minor
### 👍 What's Done Well
### Suggestions

Guidelines

Reference specific lines/files. Be actionable. Praise what's good.
Don't nitpick formatting if a linter is configured.
When unsure about a pattern, check similar code in the repo first.

同仓库更多 Skills

同仓库

yaml-doc-test

pass-culture/data-gcp

Generate YAML schema and documentation for dbt models, ensuring alignment with best practices and automated testing.

2026-07-207

gce-to-gke-migration

pass-culture/data-gcp

Migrate Airflow DAGs from GCE (SSHGCEOperator) to GKE (CustomKubernetesPodOperator). Use when the user wants to migrate a DAG from VM-based to Kubernetes-based execution, replace SSHGCEOperator with CustomKubernetesPodOperator, convert GCE tasks to KPO tasks, or mentions GCE-to-GKE migration. Also trigger when they mention removing StartGCEOperator, DeleteGCEOperator, InstallDependenciesOperator in favor of pod-based execution.

2026-07-087

data-pr-workflow

pass-culture/data-gcp

Create pull requests that follow data team standards with proper naming conventions, commit validation, and squash-and-merge workflow. Use this skill when the user wants to create a PR, mentions pull requests, needs help with commit naming, wants to clean up commits before review, or talks about submitting work for review. Also trigger when they mention tickets like DE-XXX, HF-XXX, or BSR, or when they're working with dbt, bq_jobs, ml_jobs, or analytics code and need to get their changes reviewed.

2026-06-297

vulnerability-fix

pass-culture/data-gcp

Fix Python package vulnerabilities for a single uv.lock file by updating pyproject.toml and tool.uv constraint-dependencies, then regenerating the lockfile.

2026-06-107

PR Review Skill

Context Gathering

Determine the main branch, then diff against it:

MAIN=$(git remote show origin | sed -n '/HEAD branch/s/.*: //p')
git fetch origin "$MAIN"
git --no-pager diff "origin/$MAIN...HEAD"

Read adjacent code for each modified file.

Check for new/modified tests related to changes.

If dependency files changed (pyproject.toml, uv.lock, requirements.txt), use the validate_cves tool.

Evaluation Criteria

Hints below are additional focus areas — use your own judgment to evaluate thoroughly.

Bugs (weight: critical)

Security (weight: critical)

Tests & Reliability (weight: high)

Improvements (weight: medium) — simpler libraries, unnecessary complexity, performance.

Technical Quality (weight: medium) — AHA rule: only extract when used >3 times.

Consistency (weight: low) — match patterns/naming/style of surrounding code.

Severity Levels

🔴 Blocker: Must fix before merge.

🟠 Important: Should fix.

🟡 Minor: Nice to fix.

Scoring Rules

Any 🔴 → Overall capped at 5/10.

Any 🟠 → Overall capped at 7/10.

Bugs & Security count 2x in weighted average.

Output Format

## PR Review — <PR title> | Criteria | Status | Comments | |--------------------|--------|----------| | Bugs | 🟢/🟡/🟠/🔴 | | | Security | 🟢/🟡/🟠/🔴 | | | Tests & Reliability| 🟢/🟡/🟠/🔴 | | | Improvements | 🟢/🟡/🟠/🔴 | | | Technical Quality | 🟢/🟡/🟠/🔴 | | | Consistency | 🟢/🟡/🟠/🔴 | | **Overall: X/10** ### 🔴 Blockers ### 🟠 Important ### 🟡 Minor ### 👍 What's Done Well ### Suggestions

Guidelines

Reference specific lines/files. Be actionable. Praise what's good.

Don't nitpick formatting if a linter is configured.

When unsure about a pattern, check similar code in the repo first.

name	pr-review
description	Review a pull request and rate it /10 on bugs, security, improvements, technical quality, and consistency with adjacent code.