review
Skill18 starsChanged 11 days agoMITView on GitHub
Review a pull request, or a branch against its target, and end with a merge verdict and the findings, each classed by its relation to the issue. Use when the user asks "review PR N", "review this branch", "is it ready for merge?", or asks whether a change is ready to ship.
192 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- igoroliveirg/claude-copytheir own version, first seen Nov 15, 2026
- yagizdo/quivertheir own version, first seen Nov 15, 2026
- markmhendrickson/neotomatheir own version, first seen Nov 15, 2026
- Palatine-Labs/conisotheir own version, first seen Nov 15, 2026
- ccch1mneyyy/dsh-Gotheir own version, first seen Nov 15, 2026
- automagik-si/genietheir own version, first seen Nov 15, 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
- ccch1mneyyy/dsh-Go★ 24ksame name
- tisfeng/Easydict★ 15ksame name
- juicedata/juicefs★ 15ksame name
- elie222/inbox-zero★ 13ksame 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 repository13 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- adviseSkill
- assessSkill
- autonomous-loopSkill
- awaySkill
- final-stateSkill
- implementSkill
- interviewSkill
- prdSkill
- promote-ruleSkill
- setupSkill
- shipSkill
- sweepSkill
The file
Files
Review
Answer one question: is the change ready to merge? Change no file.
- Read the diff:
gh pr diff <n>with a pull request,git diff <target>...<branch>without one. Read the linked issue, which is the specification, with the tracker file that the projectCLAUDE.mdnames,${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/trackers/linear.mdor${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/trackers/github.md. Read everyCLAUDE.mdon the path of a changed file. Judge from these three only, not from an account of the work or from an earlier review, so that each review judges the change as it is. - Review at the weight that the Business impact of the issue gives: a small issue gets a short review. Raise only what a careful senior reviewer would raise, a finding the user would act on, because minor findings cost a round each and hide the important ones.
- Prove each finding with a concrete failure: the input, the state, and the wrong result. Drop a finding you cannot make concrete, a failure that is unlikely in real use, and a failure that is safe: it stops, refuses, or reports, and loses nothing.
- Class each finding by its relation to the issue. You do not decide when it gets fixed.
- Blocker. The change is wrong, does not do what the issue asks, or breaks a
CLAUDE.mdrule. - In scope. A real bug or a clear improvement with the same root cause as the issue, or in the code this change touches.
- Out of scope. A real problem with a different root cause, such as a problem that was already in the target branch. It never blocks the merge.
- Blocker. The change is wrong, does not do what the issue asks, or breaks a
Report the verdict first, ready or not ready, with one sentence of reason. Then the blockers, each with file, line and failure, and the in-scope and out-of-scope findings, one line each. List failures only, not the checks that passed.
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.