review
Skill689 starsChanged 10 days agoMITView on GitHub
Review local code changes for bugs, regressions, missing tests, and pragmatic improvements. Use when the user asks to review the current changes from `git status`, or to review a specific backlog task by id such as `task-65` or `TASK-65`. Also trigger when the user says things like "review", "review current changes", "check my changes", "look over the diff", or "review task-42".
192 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- microsoft/veronatheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- microsoft/FluidFrameworktheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- charliee1w/consolidation-memorytheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- jisuzzzz/haechitheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- apokamo/kajitheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- dirien/yet-another-agent-harnesstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Used with
Projects 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.
dzhngSkillclose-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
LambenthanSkilldaily-arxiv
每日从 arXiv 拉取新论文，过滤相关性，auto-ingest 高优先级论文，检测 SOTA 更新
Also in 5 projects that use this
- LambenthanSkill
exp-eval
实验判决门：Review LLM 独立评判实验结果 → 4 种判决路径 → 自动更新 claims confidence、ideas status、graph edges
Also in 5 projects that use this
- +3 more from dzhng
- +5 more from Lambenthan
Other versions192 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 192
- garrytan/gstack★ 141ksame name
- ansible/ansible★ 71ksame name
- docling-project/docling★ 70ksame name
- traefik/traefik★ 65ksame name
- ClickHouse/ClickHouse★ 51ksame name
- temporalio/temporal★ 24ksame name
- tisfeng/Easydict★ 15ksame name
- juicedata/juicefs★ 15ksame name
- elie222/inbox-zero★ 13ksame name
- gitkraken/vscode-gitlens★ 10ksame name
182 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 repository7 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- close-task-commit-push-prSkill
- git-commit-push-prSkill
- prSkill
- releaseSkill
- start-taskSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 157 edited versions we read keep these.
2
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 15
If the prompt includes a backlog task id, locate the task markdown in backlog/tasks/ first, then backlog/completed/ if needed.
- Very specific: line 18
Check git status --short, inspect the diff for files related to the task, and read surrounding code where behavior is affected.
- Distinctive: line 30
Run focused tests for the touched area if they are available and cheap.
- Distinctive: line 44
If no findings are discovered, say that explicitly and mention residual risk or missing coverage.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 157 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
Overview
Review the current local changes or the implementation tied to a backlog task id and report concrete findings, not a changelog. Treat this as a code review unless the user explicitly asks for edits.
Workflow
- Resolve the review target.
If the prompt includes a backlog task id, locate the task markdown in
backlog/tasks/first, thenbacklog/completed/if needed. Read the description, acceptance criteria, and referenced files. If no task id is given, start fromgit status --shortand review the current local changes directly. - Build review scope from local context.
Check
git status --short, inspect the diff for files related to the task, and read surrounding code where behavior is affected. Preferrgand targetedgit diff -- <path>over broad scans. - Review for defects and regressions. Prioritize:
- broken behavior versus the task intent
- stale callers or UI paths left behind after refactors
- contract mismatches across main/preload/renderer/shared code
- silent failure handling and misleading fallback behavior
- missing or weak tests for the changed behavior
- unnecessary performance regressions or duplicate work
- Verify when useful. Run focused tests for the touched area if they are available and cheap. Mention clearly when verification is blocked or when broader typecheck/test failures are unrelated.
Output
Report findings first, ordered by severity. For each finding:
- state the severity
- describe the bug/risk or improvement
- include clickable file references with line numbers when available
- explain the user-visible or maintenance impact briefly
After findings, include:
- open questions or assumptions if any
- a brief note on verification performed
If no findings are discovered, say that explicitly and mention residual risk or missing coverage.
Prompt Shape
Interpret prompts like review, review current changes, or review the changes from git status as a request to review the current working tree. Interpret prompts like task-56, review task-56, or review task-56 and report any issues/bugs or possible improvements as a review of the local changes associated with that task.
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.