agentleFS
Sign inStart free
tofusitotofusito/multi-agents/skills/code-review/SKILL.md

code-review

Skill0 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub

Senior code review methodology — per-change analysis framework, review checklist (correctness, security, best practices), and verdict format for pull request reviews.

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

5 rules. 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 184 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 5

    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
  • could be automatic: a setting could enforce it
  1. Distinctive:

    Always read full file context, not just the diff.

    line 25
  2. Distinctive:

    All code paths handled (error cases, empty inputs)

    line 32
  3. Distinctive:

    Every ❌ or ⚠️ flag comes with a concrete suggested fix

    line 96
  4. Distinctive:

    Do not invent issues — if the PR is clean, say so clearly

    line 97
  5. Distinctive:

    Do not push or merge anything

    line 98

“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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Per-change analysis

For each logical change, assess:

  1. What changed — file, lines, nature of change
  2. Why — inferred intent from PR description and context
  3. Assessment — one of:
    • ✅ Best option — ideal implementation
    • ✅ Good enough — acceptable, no action needed
    • ⚠️ Improvable — works but has a better alternative
    • ❌ Problematic — bug, risk, or violation that must be addressed
  4. Suggested fix — every flag must include a concrete suggestion

Always read full file context, not just the diff. Understand intent before judging.

Review checklist

Correctness

  • Logic errors, off-by-one, wrong conditions
  • Nil/null/undefined checks missing
  • All code paths handled (error cases, empty inputs)
  • Return values checked where needed

Security

  • Input validation — SQL injection, XSS, path traversal
  • Exposed secrets or credentials in code/logs
  • Missing auth checks or authorization bypass
  • Dependency vulnerabilities

Best practices

  • Follows repo conventions and naming patterns
  • No unnecessary duplication
  • Functions/methods have single responsibility
  • Error handling is explicit, not silent

Areas to double-check

  • Complex conditional logic
  • Shared utilities or helpers modified
  • Auth, session, or persistence logic
  • Any change that affects more than one system

Potential issues

  • Breaking changes to public interfaces or contracts
  • Missing error handling on external calls
  • Performance implications (N+1, missing indexes, large payloads)
  • Missing tests for new logic paths

Escalation

Escalate to worker-heavy if the PR touches:

  • Auth/authorization/session/secret handling
  • Core architecture with non-obvious tradeoffs
  • Security-sensitive code
  • 500+ lines changed

Inform the user before escalating.

Output format

## PR Review: <repo>#<number>

### Summary
One paragraph: what the PR does and overall assessment.

### Changes
#### 1. <File or logical group> — <verdict emoji>
What changed, why, assessment, suggested fix if needed.

#### 2. ...

### Areas to Double-Check
- Specific lines or patterns worth a second look

### Best Practice Suggestions
- Non-blocking improvements

### Verdict
✅ LGTM | ✅ LGTM with nits | ⚠️ Request changes | ❌ Block

Rules

  • Be specific: exact file paths, line numbers, variable names
  • Every ❌ or ⚠️ flag comes with a concrete suggested fix
  • Do not invent issues — if the PR is clean, say so clearly
  • Do not push or merge anything

Download now (ZIP)

  • Other versions194 projects use a version of this.

    Word for word · 0

    None found.

    Edited · 0

    None found.

    Wrote their own version · 194

    1. mattpocock/skills★ 309ksame name
    2. TheAlgorithms/Python★ 226ksame name
    3. microsoft/vscode★ 194ksame name
    4. github/spec-kit★ 145ksame name
    5. ggml-org/llama.cpp★ 133ksame name
    6. shareAI-lab/learn-claude-code★ 80ksame name
    7. shareAI-lab/analysis_claude_code★ 78ksame name
    8. vectorize-io/hindsight★ 57ksame name
    9. dbeaver/dbeaver★ 52ksame name
    10. roboflow/supervision★ 51ksame 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.

  • Used alongsideProjects with it also use add-new-model, azsdk-common-sdk-breaking-change and 9 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.
    • PydanticSkill

      add-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

    • Microsoft AzureSkill

      azsdk-common-sdk-breaking-change

      Detect and mitigate SDK Breaking changes for an SDK package which is generated from TypeSpec. WHEN: "Detect SDK breaking changes for a service", "Detect SDK breaking changes for an SDK package", "Detect and mitigate SDK breaking changes for a service", "Detect and mitigate SDK breaking changes for an SDK package". INVOKES: skill: azsdk-common-generate-sdk-locally; MCP tools: azure-sdk-mcp:azsdk_customized_code_update, azure-sdk-mcp:azsdk_package_detect_breaking_change.

      Also in 4 projects that use this

    • ww-w-aiSkill

      bkend-auth

      bkend.ai authentication guide. Signup, login, JWT tokens, sessions, role-based access control, and password management with bkend.ai BaaS. Triggers: bkend auth, bkend login, bkend signup, JWT, session, RBAC, password, bkend 인증, 로그인, 회원가입, bkend認証, ログイン, 新規登録, bkend认证, 登录, 注册, autenticacion bkend, authentification bkend, bkend-Auth Do NOT use for: data operations (use $bkend-data), file storage (use $bkend-storage).

      Also in 4 projects that use this

    • ww-w-aiSkill

      bkend-cookbook

      bkend.ai cookbook with step-by-step tutorials and example projects. Build a todo app, blog, e-commerce store, and more with bkend.ai BaaS. Triggers: bkend cookbook, bkend tutorial, bkend example, todo app, blog app, bkend 쿡북, bkend 튜토리얼, 예제 프로젝트, bkendクックブック, チュートリアル, bkend教程, 示例项目, tutorial bkend, tutoriel bkend, bkend-Tutorial, ricettario Do NOT use for: initial setup (use $bkend-quickstart), specific features (use $bkend-data/auth/storage).

      Also in 4 projects that use this

    • dzhngSkill

      close-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 4 projects that use this

    • dzhngSkill

      design-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 4 projects that use this

    • +5 more from ww-w-ai
  • In this repository7 other files it gives its agents.

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

Reviews can't be read right now.

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.

Check your setup, free