codewithmukesh
from GitHub
工具与效率
Focus code review effort on the 20% of code that causes 80% of issues. Prioritizes data access, security, concurrency, and integration boundaries over formatting and style. Uses blast radius scoring to determine review depth. Includes checkpoint schedules, critical path identification, and a batch review checklist. Load this skill when reviewing code, PRs, or architecture, or when the user mentions "review", "code review", "PR review", "what should I review", "review priorities", "blast radius", or "critical path". --- # 80/20 Review ## Core Principles 1. **Review at checkpoints, not continuously** — Constant review interrupts flow. Schedule reviews at natural breakpoints: post-implementation, pre-PR, post-integration, and post-deploy. Each checkpoint has a different focus. 2. **Focus on data access, security, concurrency, integration** — These are the 20% of code areas that cause 80% of production incidents. A missing `CancellationToken` is more dangerous than a misnamed variable. Review depth should match risk. 3. **Blast radius determines depth** — A utility function used in one place gets a glance. A middleware change that affects every request gets a thorough review. Score changes by blast radius and invest review time proportionally. 4. **Automate the trivial** — Formatting, import ordering, naming conventions, and basic anti-patterns should be caught by tools (formatters, analyzers, hooks), not humans. Save human attention for things tools can't catch: logic errors, design flaws, and missing edge cases. ## Patterns ### Checkpoint Schedule Review at these natural breakpoints, each with a specific focus: ```
zhengyongjie16
from GitHub
开发与编程
资深代码审查与代码简化综合技能。用于代码检查、review、审查实现与计划一致性、评估 TypeScript 代码质量、架构设计、注释质量、类型设计、死代码清理和 PR 测试覆盖分析,并给出结构化可执行反馈。当用户提到"代码审查"、"review"、"检查代码"、"检查注释"、"类型设计评估"、"代码简化"、"死代码清理"、"无用代码清理"、"测试覆盖"、"PR 测试"等场景时使用。
espennilsen
from GitHub
工具与效率
Fix unresolved PR review threads — fetch feedback, assess each thread, apply surgical fixes, commit, push, resolve threads on GitHub, and post a summary comment. **Triggers — use this skill when:** - User says "fix PR", "fix review feedback", "address PR comments" - User pastes PR review threads or review bot output - User says "resolve review threads", "handle PR feedback" - User mentions "/gh-pr-fix" or "pr-fix" workflow - User asks to "go through PR comments and fix them" - User shares a GitHub PR URL with review feedback to address **Covers:** Any GitHub PR with unresolved review threads. Fetches threads via GraphQL, presents assessment, applies fixes, commits, pushes, resolves threads, and posts a summary comment. --- # GitHub PR Fix — Review Thread Resolution Fix unresolved review threads on a GitHub pull request. This is the manual workflow equivalent of the `/gh-pr-fix` command from the `pi-github` extension. ## Prerequisites - `gh` CLI installed and authenticated - On the PR's feature branch (or in its worktree) - Push access to the repo ## Workflow ### Step 1: Identify the PR If the user hasn't provided a PR number, detect it: ```bash # From current branch gh pr view --json number,title,headRefName,url # Or list open PRs with review feedback gh pr list --state open --json number,title,headRefName ``` ### Step 2: Fetch unresolved review threads
This skill should be used when a user asks for a code review, feedback on a PR or MR, diff assessment, or says things like 'can you review my changes', 'look at this diff', 'is this ready to merge', or 'LGTM check'. Covers correctness, style, tests, performance, security, and architecture feedback on pull/merge requests or raw diffs from any platform (GitHub, GitLab).
- 📄 architecture-review.md
- 📄 deep-review.md
- 📄 SKILL.md
Reference documents for deep code review (Level 3) and architecture review (Level 4). Used by code-reviewer agent for advanced review levels.
DCjanus
from GitHub
开发与编程
指导如何使用 CodeRabbit CLI 进行 Code Review。
Review Markdown documents using the MRSF (Sidemark) sidecar format. Use when asked to review, comment on, or provide feedback on Markdown files. Adds structured, anchored review comments via the MRSF MCP server.
Imbad0202
from GitHub
调研与分析
- 📁 agents/
- 📁 examples/
- 📁 references/
- 📄 SKILL.md
Multi-perspective academic paper review with dynamic reviewer personas. Simulates 5 independent reviewers (EIC + 3 peer reviewers + Devil's Advocate) with field-specific expertise. Supports full review, re-review (verification), quick assessment, methodology focus, and Socratic guided modes. Triggers on: review paper, peer review, manuscript review, referee report, review my paper, critique paper, simulate review, editorial review.
dimfeld
from GitHub
测试与安全
Swift Concurrency review and remediation for Swift 6.2+. Use when asked to review Swift Concurrency usage, improve concurrency compliance, or fix Swift concurrency compiler errors in a feature or file.
Review implemented changes against the repository's code review workflow. Use when a feature, fix, or hotfix PR needs review or reviewer feedback needs to be addressed.
braintrustdata
from GitHub
开发与编程
This skill should be used to review and audit the bt CLI for adherence to CLI best practices from clig.dev AND internal codebase patterns. It checks source code for help text, flags, error handling, output formatting, subcommand structure, pattern consistency, and more. Triggers on "review my code", "audit the CLI", "check CLI best practices", or /bt-review. --- # CLI Best Practices Review Audit the `bt` CLI codebase against two reference documents: 1. **clig.dev guidelines** — industry CLI best practices 2. **bt codebase patterns** — established internal conventions for consistency ## When to Use - When a user asks to review, audit, or check the CLI - When triggered via `/bt-review` - After implementing new commands or subcommands - Before releases to ensure CLI quality ## Review Process ### 1. Scope the Review
hivemoot
from GitHub
测试与安全
Structured code review methodology for PRs. Prioritizes correctness, flags common anti-patterns, enforces scope discipline, checks test coverage, and provides actionable feedback. Language-agnostic. --- ## Skill: Code Reviewer You are running with the code-reviewer skill active. Apply a structured, evidence-based review methodology to every PR you review. ### Review Priorities Review in this order. Stop blocking on lower priorities if higher ones are clean. 1. **Correctness** — Does it solve the stated problem? Does it break existing behavior? 2. **Security** — Injection, auth issues, secret exposure 3. **Reliability** — Error handling, failure modes, edge cases 4. **Performance** — N+1 patterns, unnecessary allocations, algorithmic complexity 5. **Maintainability** — Readability, naming, patterns consistency 6. **Style** — Formatting, conventions (never block on style alone) ### Common Patterns to Flag #### Silent error swallowing - Empty `catch`/`except`/`rescue` blocks or ones that only log and continue - Ignored return values from fallible operations - Suppressed errors: `|| true`, `2>/dev/null`, bare `except: pass`, `_ = err` #### N+1 and loop inefficiency - API calls, database queries, or file reads inside loops - Missing eager loading / batch operations (e.g., `prefetch_related`, `include`, `DataLoader`, `JOIN`, batch API calls) - Repeated expensive computations that could be hoisted out of the loop #### Race conditions - Shared mutable state accessed from async or concurrent contexts without guards - Check-then-act patterns without atomicity (TOCTOU) - Missing locks, mutexes, or atomic operations on concurrent data access #### Boundary issues - Missing input validation at trust boundaries (user input, API responses) - Unsafe type casts or assertions without runtime checks - Off-by-one errors in range, slice, or index operations #### Backwards compatibility - Renamed or removed public APIs without migration path - Changed function signatures that break existi