code-review
Skill1 starsChanged 14 days agoMITView on GitHub
Review PRs for merge or local changes for commit readiness. Use when asked to review a PR, branch, diff, or current changes.
194 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- mdiri-ai/SoduWorktheir own version, first seen Nov 15, 2026
- microsoft/vscodetheir own version, first seen Nov 12, 2026
- Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studiostheir own version, first seen Nov 9, 2026
- doggy8088/spec-kittheir own version, first seen Nov 9, 2026
- strelov1/freehiretheir own version, first seen Nov 9, 2026
- storybookjs/storybooktheir 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
PydanticSkilladd-new-model
Add support for a newly-released language or image generation model in pydantic-ai (e.g. openai:gpt-5.6, anthropic:claude-sonnet-5, openai:gpt-image-2). Use when a provider ships a new model id and you need to wire literals, profile flags, adapters, and tests to recognize it. Handles SDK-lag, gateway list conventions, capability probing, and direct image-model geometry.
Also in 9 projects that use this
transitive-bullshitSkillcompare-screenshots
Compare screenshots against the intended design, distinguishing approved references from historical baselines. Use for iterative implementation matching, before/after visual review, objective image telemetry, or checking a lone capture for flat, empty, or badly framed content.
Also in 5 projects that use this
Microsoft AzureSkillazsdk-common-apiview-feedback-resolution
Analyze and resolve APIView review feedback on Azure SDK PRs. **UTILITY SKILL**. USE FOR: APIView comments, API review feedback, SDK API surface changes. DO NOT USE FOR: general code review, non-APIView feedback. INVOKES: azure-sdk-mcp:azsdk_apiview_get_comments, azure-sdk-mcp:azsdk_customized_code_update, azure-sdk-mcp:azsdk_typespec_delegate_apiview_feedback, azure-sdk-mcp:azsdk_run_typespec_validation, azure-sdk-mcp:azsdk_package_generate_code.
Also in 6 projects that use this
Microsoft AzureSkillazsdk-common-generate-sdk-locally
Generate and finalize Azure SDKs locally from TypeSpec, including build, checks, tests, changelog, metadata, and version updates by default. WHEN: "generate SDK locally", "build SDK", "run SDK tests", "run CI checks", "validate package", "run checks", "update changelog", "fix SDK build errors", "resolve SDK generation errors", "customize TypeSpec", "rename SDK client", "rename SDK model", "hide operation from SDK", "fix analyzer errors", "resolve customization drift", "create subclient", "update metadata", "update version". INVOKES: azsdk_verify_setup, azsdk_package_generate_code, azsdk_package_build_code, azsdk_package_run_check, azsdk_package_run_tests, azsdk_customized_code_update, azsdk_package_update_changelog_content, azsdk_package_update_metadata, azsdk_package_update_version.
Also in 6 projects that use this
- +4 more from dzhng
- +2 more from Azure
Other versions194 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 194
- mattpocock/skills★ 325ksame name
- TheAlgorithms/Python★ 226ksame name
- microsoft/vscode★ 195ksame name
- github/spec-kit★ 150ksame name
- ggml-org/llama.cpp★ 134ksame name
- supabase/supabase★ 115ksame name
- storybookjs/storybook★ 91ksame name
- shareAI-lab/learn-claude-code★ 80ksame name
- shareAI-lab/analysis_claude_code★ 80ksame name
- vectorize-io/hindsight★ 61ksame name
184 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 repository15 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- backlog-refineSkill
- burndownSkill
- dev-cycleSkill
- issue-diagnoseSkill
- issue-implementSkill
- issue-planSkill
- issue-raiseSkill
- issue-refineSkill
- paper-docSkill
- project-statusSkill
- qaSkill
- setupSkill
- weekly-reviewSkill
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 184 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 10
Use this directory's checklist.md plus § Review Notes.
- Very specific: line 41
Remove only a clean worktree whose resolved path is inside the repo's .worktrees/.
- Distinctive: line 46
Read changed files and surrounding context via § Code Layout & Tech Stack.
- Distinctive: line 78
No worktree or separate agent.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 184 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
Code Review
Select mode first. Both require AGENTS.md § Build & Validation (commands, DB tripwires, commit convention), § Code Layout & Tech Stack, § Review Notes (checks/detail file). PR additionally requires § Repositories, § Branch Map (bases, auto-deploy), § Project Board (done automation). Missing required section: name it and stop.
Use this directory's checklist.md plus § Review Notes; output-format.md defines output/severity. Findings first; style only where it hides risk.
PR: explicit board: none skips board operations per issue-plan § Board Status Transitions; missing facts stop. Local: no board config/operations. Standalone partial PRs are allowed; transition only issues this PR actually closes, never mere references.
Modes
- PR mode (PR number/URL/branch): independent agent/worktree, PR comment, conditional squash-merge.
- Local mode (no target, uncommitted changes, pre-commit gate): in-place review, user report; any Critical/High blocks commit.
PR Mode
Reviewer must differ from implementer. If you authored/substantially edited the change, stop and spawn a reviewer with only PR number/URL, linked issue, validation expectations; never reuse implementation context/worktree. Apply dev-cycle § Subagent Dispatch: foreground by default, background only on explicit user request. Reviewer alone merges; caller (user, dev-cycle, burndown) only records results.
Review Worktree
Capture <reviewed-sha> = headRefOid, <base-sha> = baseRefOid, <base> = baseRefName; cross-check base against § Branch Map. Verify origin matches § Repositories' PR base repo; scope number-based gh commands there. Fetch PR head ref (also for forks); require captured SHA match before detached checkout:
git fetch origin <base>
git fetch origin refs/pull/<number>/head
git rev-parse FETCH_HEAD
git worktree add --detach .worktrees/review-pr-<number> <reviewed-sha>Require worktree git rev-parse HEAD = <reviewed-sha> and both captured commits available. All reads/diffs/validation run here using git diff <base-sha>...<reviewed-sha>, never moving gh pr diff. Fetch/head mismatch: fresh metadata and review, never substitute newer SHA. After comment/any merge, from original repo:
git worktree remove .worktrees/review-pr-<number>
git worktree pruneRemove only a clean worktree whose resolved path is inside the repo's .worktrees/; otherwise stop/report.
Process
gh pr view <number> --json title,body,baseRefName,baseRefOid,headRefName,headRefOid,url,closingIssuesReferences; capture SHAs before checkout. Read pinned-range paths/commits, linked issues, and paginated REST ledger comments perissue-plan; ledger = intended design.- Read changed files and surrounding context via § Code Layout & Tech Stack; apply relevant checklist/Review Notes.
- Validate touched layers where practical per § Build & Validation. Touched DB tripwire: live-database suite must pass locally or in CI before approval.
- Post per
output-format.md, header**Review complete** -- [View PR](<pr-url>)(useView jobif job URL exists), naming reviewed head/base SHAs. Re-fetch metadata; changed head requires fresh pinned checkout, validation, re-review before approval/merge. Never transfer approval to a new SHA.
Re-review (revision passes)
Existing **Review complete** comment: converge.
- Classify each prior finding Resolved, Partially resolved, or Not resolved, citing commit/hunk.
- New findings only: fix-induced regressions or release-threatening Critical/High not surfacable earlier. No previously reviewable new Medium/Low.
- Open with Prior findings recap; list only open findings/new regressions; label header re-review.
dev-cyclebounds revisions: two, then park.
Squash Merge (the reviewer merges)
Merge only if Approve, no Critical/High or important pre-merge Medium, required checks passed, PR mergeable, no production-breaking validation, no review-only request, and no § Branch Map auto-deploy the user wants to time manually.
gh pr merge <number> --repo <repo-slug> --squash --match-head-commit <reviewed-sha>Immediately before merge re-fetch head/base and reviewed-head required checks. Changed head/base or head-match rejection: refresh pinned review/validation, never just retry a newer SHA. Use PR commit subject if it meets § Build & Validation convention; otherwise write one that does. Unmet criterion: leave open and report it.
After A Merge
- Board.
board: none: skip/report. Otherwise verify registered closing issues are closed. Automation off: move only closed issues to done perissue-plan§ Board Status Transitions. Automation on: verify with the same complete lookup; report pending/failure honestly. Last open sub-issue: note parent closeable, never close it. - Branches. Detached checkout creates no local head branch. Preserve pre-existing user/implementation branches; never use
--delete-branch. Remote cleanup belongs to repository automation or a separate explicit request.
Report: comment URL, assessment, merge commit or blocking criterion, board transition, worktree and branch cleanup.
Local Mode
No worktree or separate agent.
git diff --name-onlyandgit diff --cached --name-only(or caller's paths). No changes: report/stop.- Map files via § Code Layout & Tech Stack; read diffs/surroundings and apply relevant checklist/Review Notes.
- Validate where practical; touched DB tripwire requires live-database suite before commit.
- Report per
output-format.md. Any Critical/High blocks commit: Summary says "Commit blocked:<n>Critical/High" and lists required fixes. Re-review with the same convergence discipline.
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.

