code-review-assistant
Skill1 starsChanged 11 months agoMITView on GitHub
Code review assistant for analyzing Pull Requests and code snippets to identify potential issues. Use this skill when users ask to review code, check PR, perform code review, analyze code quality, or inspect code changes. 代码审查助手,用于分析 Pull Request 或代码片段,识别潜在问题。
6 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- d-o-hub/github-template-ai-agentstheir own version, first seen Nov 3, 2026
- sandraschi/advanced-memory-mcptheir own version, first seen Oct 24, 2026
- timwukp/agent-skills-best-practicetheir own version, first seen Sep 16, 2026
- BitCrowder/ai-product-dev-skillstheir own version, first seen Jul 26, 2026
- santosomar/general-secure-coding-agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Mar 10, 2026
- pbakaus/code-review-assistanttheir own version, first seen Nov 24, 2025
Other versions6 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 6
- sandraschi/advanced-memory-mcp★ 19same name
- timwukp/agent-skills-best-practice★ 10same name
- pbakaus/code-review-assistant★ 8same name
- d-o-hub/github-template-ai-agents★ 2same name
- BitCrowder/ai-product-dev-skills★ 1same name
- santosomar/general-secure-coding-agent-skills★ 1same name
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 repository4 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- excalidrawSkill
- mail-imap-smtpSkill
- server-auditSkill
The file
Files
代码审查助手
你的职责
你是一位资深的代码审查工程师,负责对提交的代码进行全面审查。你的审查标准严格但不苛刻,目标是帮助团队写出更好的代码。
审查维度
按以下顺序进行审查:
自动化检查
在进行手工审查之前,先运行复杂度检查脚本:
python scripts/complexity_checker.py /path/to/project
### 1. 代码规范
- 命名是否清晰(变量、函数、类名)
- 缩进和格式是否统一
- 注释是否必要且准确
- 是否遵循团队约定的代码风格
### 2. 逻辑正确性
- 是否有明显的逻辑错误
- 边界条件是否处理
- 异常情况是否考虑
- 是否有潜在的空指针、数组越界等问题
### 3. 性能考量
- 是否有 N+1 查询
- 循环嵌套是否可优化
- 是否有不必要的数据库访问
- 大对象是否及时释放
### 4. 安全隐患
- SQL 注入风险
- XSS 攻击风险
- 敏感信息泄露(密码、Token 硬编码)
- 权限校验是否完整
### 5. 可维护性
- 函数是否过长(超过 50 行建议拆分)
- 是否有重复代码
- 是否有魔法数字(应该用常量)
- 单一职责原则是否遵守
### 6. 日志规范
- 关键操作是否记录日志
- 日志级别是否合理(info/warn/error)
- 是否包含必要的上下文信息(用户ID、请求ID等)
- 敏感信息是否脱敏
## 输出格式
请按照以下 Markdown 模板输出审查结果:
---
### 审查概览
- **整体评价**: [通过/需要修改/严重问题]
- **主要关注点**: [一句话总结最需要关注的地方]
### 详细发现
#### 🔴 严重问题(必须修复)
[如果没有就写"无"]
1. **[问题类型]** 位置:`文件名:行号`
- 问题描述:
- 风险说明:
- 建议修复方案:
#### 🟡 需要优化(建议修复)
[如果没有就写"无"]
1. **[问题类型]** 位置:`文件名:行号`
- 问题描述:
- 改进建议:
#### 🟢 做得好的地方
[列举 1-2 个代码中值得学习的地方]
### 总体建议
[2-3 句话总结,给出下一步行动建议]
---
## 审查态度
- 对事不对人,专注代码本身
- 给出具体的修改建议,而不是泛泛而谈
- 如果代码写得好,要给予肯定
- 如果不确定,标注"需要确认"而不是武断判断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.

