review-loop
Skill0 starsChanged 5 days agoMITView on GitHub
Use when the user asks for repeated review and correction rounds on a branch or PR within a finite budget, five rounds by default. A single review pass goes to review.
54 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- revisit-studies/studytheir own version, first seen Nov 9, 2026
- Mmbugraaslan/motion-plustheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- zane-tv/holdframetheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- seankoji-com/.agentstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- BK202503/open-claude-alltheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- Latand/delegatustheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use motion-design, polish and 7 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.
soilmassSkillmotion-design
Create animations and motion graphics using industry standards. Use when asked to animate UI elements, create video content, implement transitions, or build motion systems. Implements W3C Design Tokens, Material Design 3 baseline, and Lottie specification compliance.
Also in 5 projects that use this
HK-hubSkillpolish
Performs a final quality pass fixing alignment, spacing, consistency, and micro-detail issues before shipping. Use when the user mentions polish, finishing touches, pre-launch review, something looks off, or wants to go from good to great.
Also in 3 projects that use this
GoogleSkillto-spec
Turn the current conversation into a spec and publish it to the project issue tracker — no interview, just synthesis of what you've already discussed.
Also in 4 projects that use this
GoogleSkillimprove-codebase-architecture
Scan a codebase for deepening opportunities, present them as a visual HTML report, then grill through whichever one you pick.
Also in 5 projects that use this
AWSSkillship
Finalize dev work on an issue branch — update docs, push, and open a PR.
Also in 4 projects that use this
NVIDIASkillresearch
Before designing a feature, research how comparable libraries solve the problem, check best practices, known pitfalls, and upstream changes. Use when starting a new feature, investigating an unfamiliar area, or the user asks to research something.
Also in 5 projects that use this
- +3 more from google
Other versions54 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- Gabriel-Lafrance/Skills★ 0100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 53
- didi/mpx★ 4ksame name
- blockscout/frontend★ 310same name
- microsoft/bocpy★ 184same name
- 9thLevelSoftware/legion★ 76same name
- microsoft/Trieste★ 53same name
- revisit-studies/study★ 46same name
- timharris707/skills★ 44same name
- Latand/delegatus★ 37same name
- spxrogers/agentsync★ 35same name
- mathruffian-dot/claude-motion-explainer★ 30same name
43 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 repository18 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- analyzeSkill
- ask-gabrielSkill
- babysit-prSkill
- councilSkill
- gabriel-modeSkill
- grill-meSkill
- hillclimbSkill
- howSkill
- reviewSkill
- rulesSkill
- setup-gabriel-skillsSkill
- takeover-prSkill
- taskSkill
- test-auditSkill
- verificationSkill
- whySkill
- write-ticketSkill
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 46 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
- Distinctive: line 9
Every run applies code quality, code structure, and Plain language.
- Distinctive: line 12
Before a decision, use Asking the user.
- Distinctive: line 13
Keep the budget and backlog in the existing execution context.
- Very specific: line 24
Run the applicable review mode on a fixed scope.
- Distinctive: line 35
When nested, this is the current owner's bounded review/remediation phase, not another build orchestrator or a new reviewer per worker …
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 46 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 loop
Every run applies code quality, code structure, and Plain language. Before a decision, use Asking the user. Keep the budget and backlog in the existing execution context.
- Identify the pinned diff/base, outcome, current owner and authorized actions. Read review budget, review, and execution remediation.
- Reuse the parent's context and consumed rounds, or establish the default budget. Select a reviewer under main-context.md and follow its delegation lifecycle.
- Run the applicable review mode on a fixed scope. Keep stable IDs and evidence;
return findings to the one owner. PR comments retain
/review's publish gate. - Adjudicate once and fix only within authority. Recheck affected acceptance, then use focused remediation review and review new surface as required.
- Apply the budget's stopping rules after every round. Report rounds used, resolved and unresolved IDs, disagreements, checks and evidence limits. At five-round exhaustion with required work remaining, end with the shared budget's choice to stop or authorize up to three more rounds, then wait. Completion is a verdict on the checked scope, never automatic approval, comment publication, push or merge.
When nested, this is the current owner's bounded review/remediation phase, not another build orchestrator or a new reviewer per worker slice.
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.

