// Enterprise comprehensive code review automation with AI-powered quality
| name | moai-essentials-review |
| version | 4.0.0 |
| created | "2025-11-11T00:00:00.000Z" |
| updated | 2025-11-18 |
| status | stable |
| description | Enterprise comprehensive code review automation with AI-powered quality analysis, TRUST 5 enforcement, multi-language support, Context7 integration, security scanning, performance analysis, test coverage validation, and automated review feedback generation |
| keywords | ["code-review","quality-analysis","TRUST-5-validation","security-scanning","performance-analysis","test-coverage","ai-review","context7-integration","review-automation","enterprise-quality"] |
| allowed-tools | ["Read","Write","Edit","Glob","Bash","AskUserQuestion","mcp__context7__resolve-library-id","mcp__context7__get-library-docs","WebFetch"] |
| stability | stable |
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Skill Name | moai-essentials-review |
| Version | 4.0.0 Enterprise (2025-11-12) |
| Core Framework | TRUST 5 principles automation |
| AI Integration | ✅ Context7 MCP, AI quality analysis |
| Auto-load | On code commit or PR creation |
| Languages | 25+ languages with specialized analysis |
| Lines of Content | 880+ with 16+ production examples |
| Progressive Disclosure | 3-level (automation, analysis, advanced) |
Automates comprehensive code review process with AI-powered quality checks, TRUST 5 principle validation, security vulnerability detection, performance analysis, test coverage verification, and detailed review feedback generation.
Syntax & Linting:
✓ Run linters (pylint, eslint, golint, etc.)
✓ Check code formatting (black, prettier, gofmt)
✓ Type checking (mypy, TypeScript, go vet)
Security Scanning:
✓ Dependency vulnerabilities (safety, npm audit, cargo audit)
✓ Credential detection (git-secrets, detect-secrets)
✓ OWASP Top 10 checks
Test Coverage:
✓ Coverage ≥85%
✓ Critical paths covered
✓ Edge cases tested
TRUST 5 Validation:
✓ T - Tests present and comprehensive
✓ R - Code readable and maintainable
✓ U - Unified with codebase patterns
✓ S - Security best practices
Design Analysis:
✓ SOLID principles
✓ Design patterns appropriate
✓ Scalability concerns
✓ Performance implications
Architectural Review:
✓ Does solution fit architecture?
✓ Any alternatives considered?
✓ Trade-offs documented?
Business Logic:
✓ Does it solve the problem?
✓ Any edge cases missed?
✓ User experience impact?
Documentation:
✓ README updated
✓ API docs current
✓ Examples provided
class CodeQualityAnalyzer:
"""AI-powered code quality analysis."""
async def analyze(self, code: str) -> QualityReport:
metrics = {
"complexity": calculate_cyclomatic(code), # Should be <10
"testability": assess_testability(code), # Should be >0.85
"maintainability": calculate_maintainability(code), # Should be >80
"readability": assess_readability(code), # Should be clear
"security_issues": scan_for_vulnerabilities(code), # Should be 0
"performance_concerns": detect_patterns(code), # Should be minimal
}
return QualityReport(metrics)
T - Test First:
├─ Coverage ≥85%? ✓
├─ Happy path covered? ✓
├─ Edge cases tested? ✓
└─ Error scenarios? ✓
R - Readable:
├─ Functions <50 lines? ✓
├─ Meaningful names? ✓
├─ Comments explain WHY? ✓
└─ Complexity <10? ✓
U - Unified:
├─ Follows team patterns? ✓
├─ Consistent style? ✓
├─ Error handling aligned? ✓
└─ Logging strategy consistent? ✓
S - Secured:
├─ Inputs validated? ✓
├─ No hardcoded secrets? ✓
├─ SQL injection prevention? ✓
└─ XSS prevention? ✓
T - Trackable:
├─ SPEC referenced? ✓
Critical Checks:
✓ Hardcoded credentials (API keys, passwords)
✓ SQL injection vectors
✓ XSS vulnerabilities
✓ CSRF token absence
✓ Unsafe deserialization
✓ Privilege escalation paths
High Priority:
✓ Missing input validation
✓ Weak cryptography
✓ Insecure randomness
✓ Race conditions
✓ Dependency vulnerabilities
Medium Priority:
✓ Missing error messages
✓ Insufficient logging
✓ Memory leaks
✓ Resource exhaustion risks
Detection Patterns:
✓ O(n²) algorithms in O(n) context
✓ Unnecessary file I/O in loops
✓ Blocking operations in async code
✓ Memory allocations in hot paths
✓ Inefficient string concatenation
✓ Database queries without indexing
Optimization Suggestions:
✓ Use more efficient algorithm
✓ Cache results
✓ Batch operations
✓ Use async/await properly
✓ Index database columns
# Code Review Report
## Summary
✅ **Status**: APPROVED (with 2 minor notes)
- Test Coverage: 87% ✓
- Security: ✓ Clean
- Performance: ✓ No concerns
- Design: ✓ Good
- TRUST 5: All checks passed
## TRUST 5 Assessment
### T - Test First: ✓
Coverage: 87% (target ≥85%)
- Happy path: ✓ Covered
- Edge cases: ✓ 5 tests
- Error scenarios: ✓ 3 tests
### R - Readable: ✓
All functions <50 lines, clear names
### U - Unified: ✓
Consistent with team patterns
### S - Secured: ✓
- No credentials: ✓
- Input validation: ✓
- Error messages safe: ✓
### T - Trackable: ✓
- SPEC-042 referenced
- 5 tests linked
- Code linked to PR
## Detailed Findings
### Strengths
1. ✅ Excellent test coverage (87%)
2. ✅ Clean, readable code
3. ✅ Proper error handling
4. ✅ Security best practices followed
### Minor Notes
1. ⚠️ Function `calculate_discount` could use type hints
2. ⚠️ Consider adding cache for frequently called API
### Recommendations
1. Add type hints to improve IDE support
2. Consider Redis caching for API calls
## Approval
✅ **Ready to merge** - All TRUST 5 checks passed
Live Security Patterns: Get latest vulnerability detection from official databases
Performance Optimization: Context7 provides version-specific optimization patterns
Language Updates: Context7 includes latest language/framework best practices
moai-core-code-reviewer (Manual review guidance)moai-essentials-debug (Debugging techniques)For detailed analysis guidelines: reference.md
For real-world examples: examples.md
Last Updated: 2025-11-12
Status: Production Ready (Enterprise )