review-prompts
Skill4 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub
Review code, security, plans, architecture, performance, testing, prompt engineering, and language-specific quality. Focused .md prompt files for standalone use or delegation to sub-agents. Use when asked to review code, audit security, evaluate a plan, check architecture, assess performance, review tests, or review prompts and AI skill definitions.
In this repository10 other files it gives its agents.
- bitbucket-managerSkill
- codebase-analyzerSkill
- codex-subagentSkill
- confluence-publisherSkill
- eks-pod-opsSkill
- jenkins-managerSkill
- jira-managerSkill
- sbt-build-testSkill
- skill-creatorSkill
- super-reviewSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 17
Use this skill when the user wants to:
- Distinctive: line 21
Check architecture for SOLID violations or coupling issues
- Distinctive: line 46
Run the preflight script before first use:
- Very specific: line 108
Create a new .md file in the prompts/ directory with Role and Checklist sections only (Process, Output Format, and Constraints are …
- Distinctive: line 109
Add a row to the Available Review Types table above with the type name, file path, and a short focus description — this helps the agent …
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Review Prompts
Reusable .md prompt files that instruct an AI agent how to review a specific aspect of code, plans, or other artifacts.
When to use this skill
Use this skill when the user wants to:
- Review a pull request, commit, or set of code changes
- Audit code for security vulnerabilities
- Evaluate an implementation plan or design document
- Check architecture for SOLID violations or coupling issues
- Assess code for performance bottlenecks
- Review test quality and coverage gaps
- Apply language-specific best practices (TypeScript, Python, Java, Scala, JavaScript)
- Review prompts or AI skill definitions for prompt engineering quality
Available Review Types
| Type | File | Focus |
| Code Review | prompts/code-review.md | General code quality, logic, style, bugs, DRY, error handling |
| Security | prompts/security.md | OWASP top 10, injection, auth, secrets, crypto, input validation |
| Plan Review | prompts/plan-review.md | Structure, logic, completeness, consistency, implementation clarity |
| Architecture | prompts/architecture.md | SOLID, coupling, cohesion, separation of concerns, extensibility |
| Performance | prompts/performance.md | N+1 queries, complexity, hot paths, memory, caching, concurrency |
| Testing | prompts/testing.md | Coverage, edge cases, mocking strategy, flaky tests, integration |
| TypeScript | prompts/typescript.md | Strict null, generics, type narrowing, module patterns, TS anti-patterns |
| Python | prompts/python.md | Typing, async/await, idioms, packaging, Pythonic patterns |
| Java | prompts/java.md | Spring Boot, enterprise patterns, Java 21+, SOLID, JPA/Hibernate |
| Scala | prompts/scala.md | Functional patterns, implicits, type classes, effect systems, concurrency |
| JavaScript | prompts/javascript.md | ES2024+, async patterns, closures, Node.js, framework idioms |
| Prompt Engineering | prompts/prompt-engineering.md | Clarity, structure, examples, output format, constraints, token efficiency |
Pre-flight checks
Run the preflight script before first use:
python3 <skill_dir>/scripts/rp_preflight.pyThis checks Python version, build-prompt.py presence, shared template, prompt files, and a runtime test of --list in one pass. Each check prints [PASS], [FAIL], or [WARN]. Exit code 0 = all checks passed, 1 = at least one failed.
Building Prompts
Each review type is stored as a lean .md file (Role + Checklist only). Shared sections (Process, Output Format, Constraints) live in prompts/_shared.md. A build script assembles the complete prompt with every section in the right place.
Do not use the raw .md files in prompts/ directly — they are incomplete (missing Process, Output Format, Constraints). Always use build-prompt.py to produce a complete, ready-to-use prompt.
python3 scripts/build-prompt.py <type> # prints to stdout
python3 scripts/build-prompt.py <type> -o <file> # writes to file
python3 scripts/build-prompt.py --list # lists available typesUsage
Standalone
1. Run: python3 scripts/build-prompt.py security
2. Read the assembled prompt output
3. Apply its checklist to the target code/plan/artifact
4. Output findings in the structured severity formatWith a sub-agent
Build the prompt and pass the output to the sub-agent — the host agent never reads the prompt itself:
1. Determine which review type(s) are needed
2. Run: python3 scripts/build-prompt.py <type> -o /tmp/<type>-prompt.md
3. Pass the output file path to the sub-agent along with the review target
4. The sub-agent reads the assembled prompt, applies the checklist, and returns structured findings
5. Synthesize findings from multiple sub-agents if running parallel reviewsExample
Standalone review of a security concern:
1. Run: python3 scripts/build-prompt.py security
2. Read the target files: src/auth/login.ts, src/middleware/session.ts
3. Apply the security checklist to these files
4. Output findings in the structured severity formatParallel sub-agent review of a PR:
1. Pick review types: code-review (always), security (auth changes detected)
2. Run: python3 scripts/build-prompt.py code-review -o /tmp/cr-prompt.md
3. Run: python3 scripts/build-prompt.py security -o /tmp/sec-prompt.md
4. Launch sub-agent #1 with /tmp/cr-prompt.md + the diff
5. Launch sub-agent #2 with /tmp/sec-prompt.md + the diff
6. Collect both results, de-duplicate, synthesize into unified reviewCustom Prompts
To add a custom review type:
- Create a new
.mdfile in theprompts/directory with Role and Checklist sections only (Process, Output Format, and Constraints are assembled fromprompts/_shared.mdby the build script) - Add a row to the Available Review Types table above with the type name, file path, and a short focus description — this helps the agent pick the right prompt
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.

