Senior embedded-engineer code review. Defaults to Classic AUTOSAR embedded C and covers two concerns: (1) Correctness review — integer overflow, volatile correctness, ISR/task race conditions, stack usage, dynamic memory, control flow, AUTOSAR/ISO 26262 readiness, with findings rated Critical/Major/Minor; (2) Naming review — AUTOSAR Classic conventions for modules, SWC types, port names, runnables, C identifiers, typedefs, macros, and enumerations, aligned with MISRA Rule 5.x identifier uniqueness. Audits existing code and generates correctly-named identifiers for new work. Handles Adaptive AUTOSAR C++14+ when the input is C++ or names ara::, reviewing RAII, exceptions vs ara::core::Result, smart pointers, and AUTOSAR C++14 / MISRA C++:2023 naming. A third focus, legacy modernization assessment, proposes the smallest safe steps toward a MISRA-conformant, MCAL-abstracted, unit-tested state. Returns decision-ready findings with a built-in self-check and can emit a self-contained HTML report under analysis/.
Performs a structured, comprehensive code review of git changes (uncommitted, staged, current branch vs base, a single commit, a commit range, or a GitHub pull request or GitLab merge request by number or URL). Detects the stack and architecture automatically, applies stack- and pattern-specific rules, and reports findings by severity. Use when the user runs /code-review or /review-pr, or asks to "review my changes", "review PR", "review this branch", "do a code review", "revisar minhas mudanças", "revisar o PR" or "fazer code review".
Orchestrator. Triages a PR, local diff, patch file, or staged/branch changes into one of four review types (content, code-lite, code-deep, infra) and dispatches to the matching child skill. Use this when you don't already know which depth or type of review you want. For a known type, invoke the child skill directly.
Review the changes since a fixed point (commit, branch, tag, or merge-base) along two axes — Standards (does the code follow this repo's documented coding standards?) and Spec (does the code match what the originating issue/spec asked for?). Runs both reviews in parallel sub-agents and reports them side by side. Use when the user wants to review a branch, a PR, work-in-progress changes, or asks to "review since X".
Perform thorough code reviews of git changes (staged and committed) against a base branch, applying repo-specific review guidelines (.github/pr-review-prompt.md, CLAUDE.md) and general best practices. Use when asked to review a PR, diff, or set of changes and provide categorized feedback with file/line references and suggested fixes.
Review diffs and pull requests in Azure/typespec-azure for compatibility, .chronus change descriptions, TypeSpec diagnostics and rulesets, SDK emitter and Spector contract regressions, and meaningful tests. Use for Copilot code review in this repository.
Lightweight code review for diffs/PRs focusing on high-signal simplifications, code smells, security, performance, and whether new tests are needed; focus on recently modified code unless instructed otherwise.
Review PR, branch, commit or working-tree changes for concrete defects and fidelity to intended behavior. Also use when explicitly asked to independently challenge a prepared plan, diagnosis or verification claim.
Use when asked to review a diff, PR or uncommitted change for correctness and regressions. Not OWASP/authz -> security-review. Not deleting extras -> kill-slop.
Code review by several models at once — the host model's reviewer roles, OpenAI Codex, and a cheap third reviewer via OpenCode — reconciled into one report. Reviews whatever is named: a diff, a branch, specific files, one function, a legacy module, a whole repo. Use for any review request, a second or third opinion, a cross-check before a PR, or "code-review", "multi", "consensus review".
Internal correctness + simplification review pass of the agentic-workflow review pack — composed in-turn by review-change and product-audit; not a menu entry. Checks correctness, error handling, duplication, dead code, and simplification opportunities against the project's own conventions. Findings only; never edits code.
2354d agoReviewMountCreate a free account to mount
Review a PR or local changes with risk-based read-only reviewers, verify findings, and check the change against its project's spec and plan. Use when reviewing a remote PR or local code, including unpushed or uncommitted changes. Pass --plan=<path> to name the plan or task list.
Review pull requests in adrkit for actionable defects and conflicts with governing architecture decisions. Use during Copilot code review to inspect changed paths, retrieve relevant ADR context through the adrkit MCP server, and produce evidence-backed inline findings.
name: code-reviewer
description:
Use this skill to reviewcode. It supports both local changes (staged or working tree)
and remote Pull Requests (by ID or URL). It focuses
Plain text files in a repository that tell a coding agent how the project works: commands to run, conventions to follow and things to avoid. CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, cursor rules and skills are the common kinds.
CLAUDE.md or AGENTS.md?
CLAUDE.md is read by Claude Code. AGENTS.md is an open format that Codex, Cursor and other agents read. Many projects keep one and point the other at it.
What is a skill?
A folder with a SKILL.md that describes one capability, such as filling PDFs or reviewing code. The agent loads it only when the task calls for it.
Can I search my own team's files too?
Your agents already can, over MCP, limited to the files you're allowed to read. Searching them from this page is coming.
ptsilivisSkill
