review
Skill143 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub
Quick-reference checklist for code review conventions in leanSpec
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
dzhngSkilldesign-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
LambenthanSkillexp-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.
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
13 rules. 0 are common, 8 are distinctive, and 5 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 157 edited versions we read keep these.
8
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
5
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 12
All imports at file top — no lazy imports inside functions
- Very specific: line 13
No confusing renames — use qualified access (x25519.X25519PublicKey)
- Very specific: line 18
Never quote annotations when from __future__ import annotations is present
- Very specific: line 19
Prefer narrow domain types (Bytes32, PeerId, RequestId) over raw bytes
- Distinctive: line 26
No example code in docstrings — unit tests serve as examples
- Very specific: line 27
No section separator comments (# ====, # ----)
- Distinctive: line 32
Never use explicit function or method names in docs — names change
- Distinctive: line 33
Write short, scannable sentences — one idea per line
- Distinctive: line 34
Use bullet points or numbered lists for multiple items
- Distinctive: line 35
Never remove existing documentation unless directly invalidated by a code change
- Very specific: line 41
Use pytest.raises(ExceptionType, match=r"...") for error tests
- Distinctive: line 46
No backward compatibility code — no shims, aliases, or re-exports
- Distinctive: line 47
No unnecessary abstractions — inline is often better for spec code
“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 - Code Review Checklist
A concise checklist distilled from CLAUDE.md for reviewing leanSpec code.
Imports
- All imports at file top — no lazy imports inside functions
- No confusing renames — use qualified access (
x25519.X25519PublicKey) from __future__ import annotationsin every file
Type Annotations
- Never quote annotations when
from __future__ import annotationsis present - Prefer narrow domain types (
Bytes32,PeerId,RequestId) over rawbytes - Complete type hints on all function signatures
Code Style
- Line length: 100 characters max
- Google docstring style
- No example code in docstrings — unit tests serve as examples
- No section separator comments (
# ====,# ----) - Module-level constants use docstrings, not comments
Documentation
- Never use explicit function or method names in docs — names change
- Write short, scannable sentences — one idea per line
- Use bullet points or numbered lists for multiple items
- Never remove existing documentation unless directly invalidated by a code change
Testing
- Full equality assertions — assert the whole object, not individual fields
- Descriptive test names explaining the scenario
- Use
pytest.raises(ExceptionType, match=r"...")for error tests - Boundary values derived from source constants, never hardcoded
Architecture
- No backward compatibility code — no shims, aliases, or re-exports
- No unnecessary abstractions — inline is often better for spec code
- Simplicity over abstraction — readers should understand top-to-bottom
- SSZ types: domain-specific names (
Attestations) over generic (List4096)
Before Committing
just fix # Auto-fix lint, formatting, and markdown
just check # Verify all checks passDoes 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.

