review-gate
Skill0 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub
Use when a task is marked as needing human review. Pause, present the artifact to a human (summary + link), and wait for explicit approval before continuing. Loop on change requests; never proceed on silence.
20 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- jame-hv/brse-toolkittheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- XuHo-IT/Content-Agent-Kittheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- DonaldMurillo/gofastrtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- weedmo/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- s977043/PlanGatetheir own version, first seen Nov 2, 2026
- 0xUrsanomics/utopia-ostheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use workflow-router and diagnose.
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.
parcadeiSkillworkflow-router
Goal-based workflow orchestration - routes tasks to specialist agents based on user goals
Also in 3 projects that use this
MicrosoftSkilldiagnose
Use to systematically diagnose why scenarios fail — identifies root causes by analyzing agent traces, codebase, and behavioral patterns
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions20 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 20
- KerberosClaw/kc_ai_skills★ 79same name
- vanillagreencom/kendex★ 76same name
- DonaldMurillo/gofastr★ 24same name
- usk6666/yorishiro-proxy★ 19same name
- s977043/PlanGate★ 3same name
- toverux/cantrips★ 3same name
- XuHo-IT/Content-Agent-Kit★ 3same name
- 0xUrsanomics/utopia-os★ 2same name
- 17-sss/agent-skills★ 2same name
- Adnova-Group/muster★ 2same name
10 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.
- ai-proxy-guardSkill
- consent-complianceSkill
- context-checkpointSkill
- monorepo-bootstrapSkill
- rls-securitySkill
- security-reviewSkill
- test-and-fixSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 17 edited versions we read keep these.
2
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 18
Wait: Do not start any task that depends on this one.
- Distinctive: line 20
Never proceed on silence: Only an explicit approval advances the gate.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 17 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-gate
Human-in-the-loop approval as a reusable step. Mark certain tasks as gated; at those, a human must approve before dependent work continues.
Steps
- Confirm the task passes your done-checks.
- Set the task
Status: BLOCKED_REVIEWintasks.mdand add it to a Review Queue. - Notify the human (chat / messaging gateway / PR comment) with:
- What — a 3-bullet summary of what was built or changed.
- Where — a clickable artifact: a git diff/PR, a preview URL, a component catalogue, or a report.
- Ask — "Approve, or request changes?"
- Wait. Do not start any task that depends on this one. You may pick up an independent, non-dependent task meanwhile to keep momentum.
- Never proceed on silence. Only an explicit approval advances the gate.
Change loop
On a change request: set Status: CHANGES_REQUESTED, record the request, apply the fix with the
same-tier model, re-run done-checks, re-present, and ask again. Loop until approved, then set
DONE and clear it from the Review Queue.
Recommended always-gated work
Anything risky or irreversible: data-model/security changes, auth, payments, data deletion, and public deploys — gate these even when automated checks pass.
Token tactics
Near-zero model cost — runs in the agent's control flow. Because it pauses the workers while a human reviews, models sit idle (no spend) until approval. Oversight that also saves tokens.
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.