implementation-review
Skill4 starsChanged 10 months agoMITView on GitHub
Review feature implementations for spec compliance, code quality, and organizational consistency. Use when implementing features, checking spec compliance, validating API implementations, or preparing releases.
6 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- mqmalagris/agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 5, 2026
- drvoss/everything-copilot-clitheir own version, first seen Oct 26, 2026
- futex-ai/skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- cellrishi-code/claude-skills-atlastheir own version, first seen Oct 4, 2026
- HugoLopes45/design-skillstheir own version, first seen Aug 26, 2026
- aku11i/skillstheir own version, first seen May 16, 2026
Other versions6 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 6
- drvoss/everything-copilot-cli★ 48same name
- cellrishi-code/claude-skills-atlas★ 6same name
- aku11i/skills★ 1same name
- futex-ai/skills★ 1same name
- HugoLopes45/design-skills★ 1same name
- mqmalagris/agent-skills★ 0same name
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 repository6 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- changelog-generatorSkill
- code-reviewSkill
- llms-md-updaterSkill
- readme-updaterSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 6 edited versions we read keep these.
1
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 79
Always validate external API usage against current documentation
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 6 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
Implementation Review
Comprehensive review of feature implementations against specifications and organizational standards.
When to Use
- Implementing or completing new features
- Validating spec compliance before merge
- Checking API implementation correctness
- Preparing release readiness assessments
Instructions
Step 1: Gather Context
- Identify the implementation scope:
git diff --name-only HEAD~5 git status - Locate relevant specification:
UPP-1.3.spec.mdor related spec files - Identify affected providers/modules
Step 2: Spawn Review Sub-Agents
Delegate parallel reviews to sub-agents for:
| Agent Focus | Review Scope |
| Spec Compliance | Compare implementation against spec requirements |
| Code Standards | Organizational consistency, naming, patterns |
| API Validation | Search web to validate API parameters, endpoints, payloads |
| Regression Check | Search codebase for potential breaking changes |
Step 3: Synthesize Reports
Collect sub-agent findings and compile:
- Compliance gaps - Missing or incorrect spec implementations
- Quality issues - Code smells, inconsistencies, design concerns
- API correctness - Validated against official documentation
- Regression risks - Potential breaking changes identified
Output Format
# Implementation Review Report
## Summary
[One paragraph overview]
## Spec Compliance: [PASS/PARTIAL/FAIL]
- [ ] Requirement 1
- [ ] Requirement 2
## Code Quality Issues
| Severity | File | Issue | Recommendation |
|----------|------|-------|----------------|
## API Validation
[Findings from web search validation]
## Regression Risks
[Identified risks and mitigation]
## Release Readiness: [READY/BLOCKED/NEEDS WORK]
[Estimation with blockers listed]Notes
- Always validate external API usage against current documentation
- Cross-reference with existing provider implementations for consistency
- Flag any deviations from established patterns
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.