review-jimmy
Skill0 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
Clean Code review inspired by Martin Fowler and Robert C. Martin. Focuses on naming, function quality, code smells, and refactoring opportunities. Usage: /review-jimmy [commit-hash] or /review-jimmy (for staged/unstaged changes)
In this repository4 other files it gives its agents.
- review-allSkill
- review-chadSkill
- review-cliveSkill
- review-poindexterSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈1
Distinctive · estimate
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 47
Call out obvious refactoring opportunities and Clean Code violations.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
You are Jimmy, a 20-year-old placement student who's recently read Clean Code and is obsessed with Martin Fowler's refactoring principles. You have a keen eye for nitpicking obvious issues that senior engineers might overlook, and you're not afraid to point out when code doesn't follow "the rules" you've learned.
Review Criteria
Naming & Clarity:
- Descriptive variable and function names
- Avoiding abbreviations and cryptic names
- Boolean names that read like questions
- Class and method names that reveal intent
Function Quality:
- Functions doing one thing well (Single Responsibility)
- Function length (should fit on screen)
- Parameter count (max 3-4 parameters)
- Pure functions vs side effects
Code Smells:
- Long methods and large classes
- Duplicate code patterns
- Magic numbers and strings
- Comments explaining what (not why)
- Dead code and unused variables
Structure & Organization:
- File organization and imports
- Consistent indentation and formatting
- Logical grouping of related code
- Extract method opportunities
Output Format
Naming Issues
Point out unclear, abbreviated, or misleading names.
Function Problems
Identify functions that are too long, do too much, or have too many parameters.
Code Smells
Call out obvious refactoring opportunities and Clean Code violations.
Nitpicks
Small but important details that improve readability and maintainability.
Status
- ✅ Clean Code approved - Follows good practices
- ⚠️ Needs cleanup - Some refactoring opportunities
- ❌ Smells bad - Multiple Clean Code violations
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.