agentleFS
Sign inStart free
abdullahkhawerabdullahkhawer/devops-skills/skills/code-review/SKILL.md

code-review

Skill8 starsChanged 6 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub

Analyze code changes between two local Git branches and perform a comprehensive code review. Use ONLY for local git branch comparisons. Do NOT use when a GitLab or GitHub MR/PR URL or MR ID is provided — use gitlab-cli or github-cli skill instead.

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

8 rules. 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 183 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 7

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Ask the user the following two questions together if not already provided:

    line 12
  2. Distinctive:

    If the user has already provided either value upfront, skip the corresponding question.

    line 21
  3. Distinctive:

    If the output is empty, report that there are no differences between the two branches and stop.

    line 31
  4. Distinctive:

    Only include code snippets that actually require changes — do not repeat code that looks fine.

    line 62
  5. Distinctive:

    If no issues are found, state clearly that the code looks good and summarize what was reviewed.

    line 64
  6. Very specific:

    Always use git diff <TARGET_BRANCH> <SOURCE_BRANCH> — never checkout branches or modify the working tree.

    line 70
  7. Distinctive:

    Do not suggest changes for code outside the diff scope.

    line 72
  8. Distinctive:

    If a branch name does not exist, report the error and ask the user to verify the branch names.

    line 73

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 183 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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Code Review Skill

Run this skill when asked to review code, compare branches, or perform a code review between a source and target branch using local git. Do NOT use this skill if the user provides a GitLab or GitHub MR/PR URL or MR ID — use the gitlab-cli or github-cli skill instead.

Step 1 — Collect inputs

Ask the user the following two questions together if not already provided:

Kindly let me know:

1. Source Branch: What is the name of the source branch (the branch with new changes)?
2. Target Branch: What is the name of the target branch (usually main/master)?

If the user has already provided either value upfront, skip the corresponding question.

Step 2 — Find changed files

git diff --name-only <TARGET_BRANCH> <SOURCE_BRANCH>

If the output is empty, report that there are no differences between the two branches and stop.

Step 3 — Analyze each changed file

For each file returned in Step 2, read the full diff:

git diff <TARGET_BRANCH> <SOURCE_BRANCH> -- <FILE_PATH>

Perform a comprehensive code review across all changed files covering:

  • Security: Secrets exposure, API keys, tokens, SQL injection, XSS, command injection, insecure dependencies.
  • Performance: Inefficient algorithms, memory leaks, unnecessary computations, N+1 queries.
  • Code quality: Code smells, duplicate code, overly complex functions, trailing whitespace, dead code.
  • Error handling: Missing or incorrect error handling, unhandled exceptions, silent failures.
  • Logging: Missing or excessive logging, sensitive data in logs.
  • Documentation: Missing or outdated comments, unclear variable/function names.

Step 4 — Report findings

For each issue found:

  • State the file path and line number(s).
  • Show the existing code snippet that needs to change.
  • Provide the suggested fix or improvement.

Only include code snippets that actually require changes — do not repeat code that looks fine.

If no issues are found, state clearly that the code looks good and summarize what was reviewed.

Rules

  • Always use git diff <TARGET_BRANCH> <SOURCE_BRANCH> — never checkout branches or modify the working tree.
  • Report file paths relative to the repository root.
  • Do not suggest changes for code outside the diff scope.
  • If a branch name does not exist, report the error and ask the user to verify the branch names.

Download now (ZIP)

  • Other versions193 projects use a version of this.

    Word for word · 0

    None found.

    Edited · 0

    None found.

    Wrote their own version · 193

    1. mattpocock/skills★ 309ksame name
    2. TheAlgorithms/Python★ 226ksame name
    3. microsoft/vscode★ 194ksame name
    4. github/spec-kit★ 145ksame name
    5. ggml-org/llama.cpp★ 133ksame name
    6. shareAI-lab/analysis_claude_code★ 80ksame name
    7. shareAI-lab/learn-claude-code★ 80ksame name
    8. vectorize-io/hindsight★ 57ksame name
    9. dbeaver/dbeaver★ 52ksame name
    10. roboflow/supervision★ 51ksame name

    183 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.

  • Used alongsideProjects 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.
    • dzhngSkill

      close-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

    • dzhngSkill

      design-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

    • PydanticSkill

      add-new-model

      Add support for a newly-released language or image generation model in pydantic-ai (e.g. openai:gpt-5.6, anthropic:claude-sonnet-5, openai:gpt-image-2). Use when a provider ships a new model id and you need to wire literals, profile flags, adapters, and tests to recognize it. Handles SDK-lag, gateway list conventions, capability probing, and direct image-model geometry.

      Also in 9 projects that use this

    • transitive-bullshitSkill

      compare-screenshots

      Compare screenshots against the intended design, distinguishing approved references from historical baselines. Use for iterative implementation matching, before/after visual review, objective image telemetry, or checking a lone capture for flat, empty, or badly framed content.

      Also in 5 projects that use this

    • Microsoft AzureSkill

      azsdk-common-apiview-feedback-resolution

      Analyze and resolve APIView review feedback on Azure SDK PRs. **UTILITY SKILL**. USE FOR: APIView comments, API review feedback, SDK API surface changes. DO NOT USE FOR: general code review, non-APIView feedback. INVOKES: azure-sdk-mcp:azsdk_apiview_get_comments, azure-sdk-mcp:azsdk_customized_code_update, azure-sdk-mcp:azsdk_typespec_delegate_apiview_feedback, azure-sdk-mcp:azsdk_run_typespec_validation, azure-sdk-mcp:azsdk_package_generate_code.

      Also in 6 projects that use this

    • Microsoft AzureSkill

      azsdk-common-generate-sdk-locally

      Generate and finalize Azure SDKs locally from TypeSpec, including build, checks, tests, changelog, metadata, and version updates by default. WHEN: "generate SDK locally", "build SDK", "run SDK tests", "run CI checks", "validate package", "run checks", "update changelog", "fix SDK build errors", "resolve SDK generation errors", "customize TypeSpec", "rename SDK client", "rename SDK model", "hide operation from SDK", "fix analyzer errors", "resolve customization drift", "create subclient", "update metadata", "update version". INVOKES: azsdk_verify_setup, azsdk_package_generate_code, azsdk_package_build_code, azsdk_package_run_check, azsdk_package_run_tests, azsdk_customized_code_update, azsdk_package_update_changelog_content, azsdk_package_update_metadata, azsdk_package_update_version.

      Also in 6 projects that use this

    • +3 more from dzhng
    • +2 more from Azure
  • In this repository54 other files it gives its agents.

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.

Check your setup, free