review
Skill1 starsChanged 53 days agoMITView on GitHub
Dispatch a code reviewer subagent before any SVN commit. Mandatory after each implement slice, after completing a major feature, and before committing to trunk.
192 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- microsoft/veronatheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- microsoft/FluidFrameworktheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- charliee1w/consolidation-memorytheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- jisuzzzz/haechitheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- apokamo/kajitheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- dirien/yet-another-agent-harnesstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use close-spec, design-with-images and 10 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
dzhngSkillclose-spec
When a spec under specs/<feature>/ is done shipping (a write-spec build, or any planned task that produced a spec), archive it to specs/done/ and rewrite it from a build-plan into a durable rationale — the why, the principles, the invariants — pointing back to the real code for the how. Use when implementation has landed and the plan no longer matches what shipped, or the user says a feature/spec is finished. Pairs with [write-spec](../write-spec/SKILL.md) (the plan this closes) and [review](../review/SKILL.md) (run before closing).
Also in 5 projects that use this
dzhngSkilldesign-with-images
Explore UI and visual design with image generation, then iterate the real implementation against the user-selected concept. Use when brainstorming visual directions, offering mockup variants, or implementing an approved generated design; do not stop at the mockups or the first code approximation.
Also in 5 projects that use this
LambenthanSkilldaily-arxiv
每日从 arXiv 拉取新论文,过滤相关性,auto-ingest 高优先级论文,检测 SOTA 更新
Also in 5 projects that use this
LambenthanSkillexp-eval
实验判决门:Review LLM 独立评判实验结果 → 4 种判决路径 → 自动更新 claims confidence、ideas status、graph edges
Also in 5 projects that use this
- +3 more from dzhng
- +5 more from Lambenthan
Other versions192 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 192
- garrytan/gstack★ 141ksame name
- ansible/ansible★ 71ksame name
- docling-project/docling★ 70ksame name
- traefik/traefik★ 65ksame name
- ClickHouse/ClickHouse★ 51ksame name
- temporalio/temporal★ 24ksame name
- tisfeng/Easydict★ 15ksame name
- juicedata/juicefs★ 15ksame name
- elie222/inbox-zero★ 13ksame name
- gitkraken/vscode-gitlens★ 10ksame name
182 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository23 other files it gives its agents.
- adversarial-gameplay-acceptanceSkill
- ai-daily-pulseSkill
- beautiful-feishu-whiteboardSkill
- cpp-codereviewSkill
- daily-weekly-reportSkill
- feishu-cardSkill
- architectSkill
- brainstormSkill
- cavemanSkill
- debugSkill
- grillSkill
- guideSkill
- handoffSkill
- implementSkill
- planSkill
- prototypeSkill
- to-issuesSkill
- to-prdSkill
- triageSkill
- zoom-outSkill
- silk-designSkill
- tig-acting-taskSkill
- xhs-zine-coverSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 157 edited versions we read keep these.
4
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 15
After each implement slice (before svn commit)
- Distinctive: line 16
After completing a major feature
- Distinctive: line 17
Before committing to trunk
- Distinctive: line 20
When stuck — fresh perspective often unblocks
- Distinctive: line 21
Before a large refactor — establish a baseline
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 157 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Review
Dispatch a code reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade into more work. The reviewer gets focused context — not your session history.
Core principle: Review early, review often. Fix Critical and Important issues before committing.
When to Review
Mandatory:
- After each implement slice (before
svn commit) - After completing a major feature
- Before committing to trunk
Optional but valuable:
- When stuck — fresh perspective often unblocks
- Before a large refactor — establish a baseline
How to Request
1. Get SVN revisions:
# For committed changes:
HEAD_REV=$(svn info --show-item last-changed-revision)
BASE_REV=$((HEAD_REV - 1))
# For uncommitted local changes — skip rev lookup, just diff:
svn status
svn diff2. Dispatch a code reviewer subagent (use Agent tool, general-purpose type):
Fill in these placeholders from code-reviewer-prompt.md:
{DESCRIPTION}— brief summary of what was built{PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS}— what it should do{BASE_REV}— starting SVN revision (orPREV){HEAD_REV}— ending revision (or usesvn difffor uncommitted)
3. Act on feedback:
- Critical — fix immediately, never commit with unresolved Critical issues
- Important — fix before committing
- Minor — note for later, optional
Reviewer Prompt Template
You are a Senior Code Reviewer for a C++ game server.
Review the changes below against the requirements and identify issues before they cascade.
## What Was Implemented
{DESCRIPTION}
## Requirements / Plan
{PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS}
## SVN Range to Review
Base revision: {BASE_REV}
Head revision: {HEAD_REV}
```bash
# For committed revisions:
svn diff -r {BASE_REV}:{HEAD_REV} --summarize
svn diff -r {BASE_REV}:{HEAD_REV}
# For uncommitted local changes:
svn status
svn diffWhat to Check
C++ game server conventions:
- Naming: m_ prefix for members; i/b/s/v/st/p prefixes for locals; PascalCase classes
- Subtraction: must use
SafeSub()— no direct--or-= - Map lookups: must use
FindMapPtr— no raw.find()+ iterator compare - String conversion:
ToString()notstd::to_string() - Control flow: all
if/for/whilebodies use full brace blocks, braces on their own lines setChanged()called after all persistent data modificationssendResponse()only in CmdParser layer, never inside Logic/Manager- New CS/SC commands registered in
CommandRegister.h - Error codes use
ERR_prefix;iRetdeclared asint32_t
Architecture:
- CmdParser / Logic layer separation respected?
loop()functions have throttle guards?- Protocol IDs unique and non-overlapping?
Logic correctness:
- Off-by-one errors?
- Integer underflow risks?
- Missing null checks on pointer lookups?
Output Format
Strengths
[What's well done — be specific]
Issues
Critical (Must Fix)
[Bugs, data loss risks, broken functionality, convention violations that cause runtime errors]
Important (Should Fix Before Commit)
[Architecture problems, missing setChanged(), wrong layer placement, missing registration]
Minor (Nice to Have)
[Style, optimization, documentation polish]
For each issue: file:line reference, what's wrong, why it matters, how to fix.
Assessment
Ready to commit? [Yes | No | With fixes]
Reasoning: [1-2 sentence technical assessment]
## Example
[Just implemented Task 2: Add feature query]
BASE_REV=$(svn info --show-item last-changed-revision) # e.g. 4820 BASE_REV=$((BASE_REV - 1)) # 4819 — before this task
[Dispatch code reviewer subagent] DESCRIPTION: Added getXxxRank() in RoleXxx.cpp and handle_Xxx_Yyy handler PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from docs/plans/2026-05-12-feature.md BASE_REV: 4819 HEAD_REV: 4820
[Reviewer returns]: Strengths: Clean iRet propagation, correct layer separation Issues: Important: Missing setChanged() after m_oCache.iScore update Minor: Magic number 100 for rank cap — extract to constant Assessment: Fix before commit
[Fix setChanged() call] svn commit -m "feat: add feature query"
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

