agentleFS
Sign inStart free
zieang88888zieang88888/zhskills/skills/code-review/SKILL.md

code-review

Skill1 starsChanged 46 days agoMITView on GitHub

对代码改动做双轴审查——Standards（是否符合成文规范 + Fowler 12 条坏味道基线）与 Spec（是否忠实实现需求文档），两轴分头审查后并排汇总、不跨轴排序。当用户粘贴代码 diff / 新旧对照，要求"审查这段改动 / code review / 看看这次提交有没有问题"时使用。

194 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

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.
  • 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 5 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 5 projects that use this

  • 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

  • transitive-bullshitSkill

    compare-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 AzureSkill

    azsdk-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 AzureSkill

    azsdk-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

The file

Create a free account to mount
Files
SKILL.md

代码审查 · code-review

二次开发：本技能改编自 mattpocock/skills 的 skills/engineering/code-review（MIT License © 2026 Matt Pocock），在保留其双轴审查方法论基础上，升级为「提示词 + 可执行 CLI」双形态。署名见本目录 NOTICE.md 与仓库 THIRD_PARTY_NOTICES.md。

这个技能做什么

对一段代码改动（diff 文本或新旧代码对照）做双轴审查。两轴分头跑、互不污染上下文，最后并排汇总：

  • Standards 轴：改动是否符合项目的文档化规范；并叠加 Fowler《重构》第 3 章的 12 条坏味道基线作为固定判断项。
  • Spec 轴：改动是否忠实实现了原始需求文档——只找三类问题：需求缺失或只做一半、范围蔓延（需求没要求却多做了）、看似实现实则错误。

两轴可以一好一坏：规范全中却做错需求，或需求全中却违反项目约定——分开报告就是为了让一轴不掩盖另一轴。

输入要求

  • 必填：代码改动——直接粘贴 diff 文本，或新旧代码对照（CLI：文件路径，- 读 stdin）。
  • 可选：需求文档（CLI：--spec <路径>）。不提供时只跑 Standards 轴，并在输出与提示中注明。
  • 可选：项目成文规范（如 CODING_STANDARDS.md / CONTRIBUTING.md 的内容）——材料里看得到就引用出处，看不到就只用 12 条坏味道基线。
  • 信息不足时不臆造规范条款与需求原文，存疑处标「（待确认）」。

输出结构（模板见 scripts/templates/code-review.template.md）

  1. 标题与输入信息（代码来源、是否带需求文档）。
  2. ## Standards：硬违规（引用规范出处：文件 + 条款）与判断项（标注「可能的 XX 坏味道」+ 引用代码片段）分开列；末尾本轴小结（共几项、最严重问题）。
  3. ## Spec：按「需求缺失 / 范围蔓延 / 看似实现实则错误」三类分组，每条引用需求原文；末尾本轴小结。未提供需求文档时本轴注明跳过。
  4. 末尾说明：两轴并列输出、未跨轴排序。

工作流程

  1. 读改动：识别这是 diff 还是新旧对照，弄清改了哪些文件、每个 hunk 改了什么。
  2. Standards 轴（先跑，独立上下文）：
    • 材料里有可见成文规范 → 逐条对照，违反处引规范出处，记为硬违规；
    • 无论有没有成文规范，都用 12 条坏味道基线过一遍：神秘命名、重复代码、依恋情结、数据泥团、基本类型偏执、重复 switch、散弹式修改、发散式变化、推测性泛化、过长消息链、中间人、拒绝继承。每条只作判断项（「可能的……」），不作硬违规；
    • 成文规范优先：规范认可的写法即使撞基线也压制不报；linter / 格式化器已强制的事项跳过。
  3. Spec 轴（后跑，独立上下文）：拿代码改动对照需求原文，只报三类——缺失/半成品、范围蔓延、看似对实则错，每条引需求原文。
  4. 并排汇总：两节并列输出，不合并、不跨轴排序；每轴末尾给总数与该轴最严重问题。

质量规则（必须遵守）

  • 成文规范优先于基线：有出处的规范违反才算硬违规；Fowler 坏味道永远是判断项，措辞用「可能的……」。
  • 逐条引据：Standards 引规范出处或代码片段；Spec 引需求原文，不凭印象下结论。
  • 不跨轴排序：不因为"这是严重坏味道"就盖过需求问题，反之亦然；两轴各自小结即可。
  • 忠于材料：材料里没有的规范条款、需求原文，不编造；存疑标「（待确认）」。
  • 跳过工具已强制项：linter / formatter / 类型检查已经兜住的风格问题不再重复报。
  • 简短有据：每条发现一句话说清问题 + 位置/出处 + 怎么改。

边界与异常处理

  • 没有需求文档（未提供 --spec）→ 只跑 Standards 轴，## Spec 节注明「未提供需求文档，本轴跳过」。
  • 输入不是标准 diff、只是两段代码对照 → 按"新增了什么 / 改了什么"理解，不强行套用 diff 语法。
  • 改动过长 → 分块审查，跨块发现注明「（跨文件 / 跨块）」。
  • 材料中完全看不到成文规范 → Standards 轴只报 12 条坏味道判断项，并注明「未见项目成文规范，仅按 Fowler 基线审查」。
  • 只改注释 / 文档 → 如实说明无代码逻辑问题，不硬凑发现。

与脚本配合

  • 批量 / 命令行场景：scripts/draft_code_review.py（纯标准库，一条命令跑通；双轴自动按"先 Standards 后 Spec"顺序执行，互不串用上下文）。
  • 自定义模板：复制 scripts/templates/code-review.template.md 修改后使用。

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.

Check your setup, free