review-changes
Skill331 starsChanged 8 days agoMITView on GitHub
Reviews a finished change with fresh reviewers (a task review, a blast-radius review for shared code, and Doistbot or per-check subagents), then confirms each finding before acting on it. Use when the owner says a change is "ready for a PR", "ready to merge" or ready for a release, or asks for "a review".
- Reads credentials
34 other projects use a version of this, 1 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- Doist/todoist-aiedited, first seen Nov 9, 2026
- lklimek/claudiustheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- salasebas/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- pumpkit-io/sdlctheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- alexandrecsp/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- timohaa/scopewalker-mcptheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use explore-codebase, debug-issue 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.
srclightSkillexplore-codebase
This skill should be used when the user asks to "explore this codebase", "understand this project", "give me an overview", "how does this work", "onboard me", "walk me through the architecture", "map the codebase", or any request to understand a codebase's structure, architecture, or design.
Also in 4 projects that use this
NVIDIASkilldebug-issue
Use when the user asks to debug, investigate, or fix a GitHub issue or supplies a repository bug report.
Also in 4 projects that use this
srclightSkillrefactor-safely
This skill should be used when the user asks to "refactor", "rename", "move", "change a function signature", "extract a method", "delete unused code", "clean up", or any modification that could break callers or dependents. Provides a pre-change safety checklist using srclight's graph tools to assess blast radius before touching code.
Also in 4 projects that use this
GoogleSkillto-tickets
Break a plan, spec, or the current conversation into a set of tracer-bullet tickets, each declaring its blocking edges, published to the configured tracker — edges as text in one file per ticket locally, or native blocking links on a real tracker.
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 3 projects that use this
MicrosoftSkillwriting-for-agents
Writing documents for agents. Use when creating or editing skills, or modifying AGENTS.md or CLAUDE.md.
Also in 3 projects that use this
- +3 more from google
Other versions34 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 1
- Doist/todoist-ai★ 56388% same
Wrote their own version · 33
- tirth8205/code-review-graph★ 33ksame name
- docker/docs★ 4.7ksame name
- blockscout/frontend★ 310same name
- timothywarner-org/claude-code★ 223same name
- appclawhq/AppClaw★ 111same name
- munvard/dockterm★ 48same name
- uniffy-io/uniffy★ 26same name
- jjxmonster/skills★ 8same name
- Arasz/ai-badger★ 3same name
- imMamdouhaboammar/get-things-done★ 2same name
23 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 repository11 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- docs/agents.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- add-commandSkill
- build-featureSkill
- fix-bugSkill
- learnSkill
- refactorSkill
- verifySkill
- write-testsSkill
- todoist-cliSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 33 edited versions we read keep these.
2
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
3
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 14
Write the brief from references/reviewer-brief.md: the task in the owner's words, what done means, the decisions made.
- Very specific: line 24
Every brief says: the shared working tree is read-only.
- Very specific: line 28
Use it when doistbot --version prints 1.0.12 or newer and doistbot doctor succeeds.
- Very specific: line 32
Read status, verified and providerFailures first.
- Distinctive: line 43
Look again when new evidence appears.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 33 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 a change
Reviews cost several agent runs. Run them when the owner says the change is ready, or asks. During work, npm run verify is the check.
1. Prepare
npm run verifypasses.- List the untracked files (
git ls-files --others --exclude-standard): they reach the reviewers and Doistbot's model providers. Gitignored files (.env,.tmp/) are not listed, andnpm run review:worktreenever copies them. Check every listed file for credentials, tokens and personal data; send none that holds them, and ask the owner about any file that does or that doesn't belong to the change. Nevergit add -Ato tidy up. - Write the brief from references/reviewer-brief.md: the task in the owner's words, what done means, the decisions made. Never your own opinion of the change, or your reasoning.
Done when the brief is written and the tree holds only the change, with no secrets or personal data in it.
2. Run the reviews in parallel
- Task review, always: a fresh subagent with the brief and the diff. It looks for missing pieces, unrequested changes, unhandled cases, tests that would pass with the feature broken, and, in a refactor, any changed test input or assertion. Doistbot can't do this: it never sees the task.
- Blast-radius review, when the change alters code others rely on:
src/lib/, command registration, global flags or argv handling insrc/index.ts, the@doist/cli-coreor@doist/todoist-sdkversion, otherpackage.jsondependencies, build or CI config. It names the one fact that makes the change safe and proves it by running code. It looks where text search stops: library versions inpackage-lock.json, the shape of API responses, scripts and installed skills reading--jsonoutput, extensions receivingTD_*variables. - Code review: Doistbot if it is set up (below). Otherwise one subagent per relevant check in
.agents/checks/, each with the brief and that check.
Every brief says: the shared working tree is read-only. A reviewer that needs to run or break code makes its own copy with npm run review:worktree -- <dir>, then npm ci in it, and removes it after.
3. Doistbot locally
Use it when doistbot --version prints 1.0.12 or newer and doistbot doctor succeeds. Otherwise use the per-check subagents and tell the owner Doistbot was skipped.
- Off the default branch:
doistbot review --json. In a stack:doistbot review --base <branch below> --json. Both cover commits, staged and unstaged edits, and untracked files. Nothing needs staging. - Not
doistbot review staged: it skips the branch's commits and still reportsverified. - Read
status,verifiedandproviderFailuresfirst. An unverified review, or one with a failed provider, is partial: say so, and cover that gap with a subagent. - It runs before the Doistbot review on the pull request, not instead of it.
4. Confirm each finding
Reviewers rate findings on the verify ladder. Take each to the rung its claim needs: the cited line for what the diff shows, a failing test or command for a behaviour claim. Then:
- fix it,
- dismiss it with evidence at that rung (the line, the test output), never an argument, or
- leave it open for the owner, saying what would settle it.
Look again when new evidence appears. Done when every finding has one of the three.
5. Fix, verify, re-review
Fix, then npm run verify. A large fix gets its own task review. Report the findings with what happened to each, in the verify report format.
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.

