code-review-russ-cox

Included with Lifetime

$97 forever

Review code for simplicity, necessity, and anti-bloat — whether code, features, or dependencies should exist at all. Use when reviewing system design, dependency additions, new features, or when the user asks "do we need this?", "is this too complex?", or wants a deletion-focused review. Do NOT use for API design or product-vs-library tradeoffs (use code-review-mitsuhiko).

Design

What this skill does


# code-review-russ-cox

Maintenance cost vastly exceeds implementation cost. Optimize every decision for the 5-year reader, not the 5-minute author.

## Steps

1. **Understand the problem** — what is this change *actually* solving? If you can't state it in one sentence, ask before reviewing.
2. **Walk the four passes** below in order. Each pass is a checklist of questions; flag whatever fails.
3. **Apply the five universal tests** to anything that survived the four passes.
4. **Produce findings** in the output format below.

## Pass 1 — Feature creep ("useful" ≠ "worth it")

- What problem does this solve that can't be solved by composing existing features?
- What is the 5-year maintenance cost vs. the user value?
- Does this break orthogonality (adding a *second* way to do something)?
- Is this driven by actual need, or by "competitor X has it" / resume-building?

## Pass 2 — Wrong-layer fixes (band-aids on band-aids)

- At which layer should this logic actually live?
- Are we treating symptoms or causes?
- How many indirection layers separate intent from implementation?
- Could we eliminate this entire module by fixing the underlying issue?

## Pass 3 — Dependency explosion (the hidden iceberg)

- What does this dependency actually do? (Read the code, not the README.)
- How many transitive dependencies does it bring?
- Can we implement this in 20–50 lines instead?
- What happens when this dependency is abandoned, breaks, or has a CVE?
- Is its maintenance history solid?

## Pass 4 — Quality standards ("ship now, fix later" rarely happens)

- Would we be proud to have this reviewed publicly?
- Will someone unfamiliar understand this in 6 months?
- Are we accepting this because of time pressure, or because it meets the bar?
- If we merge this with debt, what's the *concrete* plan to pay it down?

## Five universal tests

Apply to anything new or non-trivial:

- **Simplicity** — explainable to a smart junior in 2 minutes?
- **Deletion** — what happens if we delete this? If "nothing bad", delete it.
- **Composition** — can existing primitives combine to solve this? If yes, don't add new ones.
- **Future-self** — will I understand this at 2am during an outage in 6 months?
- **Abstraction** — do we have 3+ concrete use cases? If no, it's premature; solve directly first.

## Output format

```
## Summary
<one paragraph: overall verdict and the single most important issue>

## Must fix
- [Pass N | file:line] <finding>. Suggested approach: <sketch>.

## Consider
- [Pass N | file:line] <finding>. Tradeoff: <what's gained vs lost>.

## Praise
- <what was done well — name it specifically; this isn't filler>

## Open questions
- <anything that needs author context before a final call>
```

## Constructive phrasing

Don't say "this is too complex" — say *"this has N layers of indirection; could we solve directly: [sketch]; tradeoffs: [list]."* Always pair a critique with a concrete alternative or a specific question. See PRINCIPLES.md for more phrasing patterns and the anti-pattern catalog.

## When to compromise the principles

Hard deadlines with documented debt plans, regulatory requirements, vendor lock-in chosen with eyes open, or team-skill constraints. **Never** compromise on: security, data integrity, silent failures, critical paths without tests. Details in PRINCIPLES.md.

## Reference

- [PRINCIPLES.md](PRINCIPLES.md) — root-cause explanations, anti-pattern catalog, language-specific notes, full constructive-feedback patterns, source quotes.

Files: 2

Size: 10.3 KB

Complexity: 17/100

Category: Design

Source: https://github.com/wilbeibi/claude-toolkit/tree/main/skills/code-review-russ-cox

Related in Design

contribute

Included

Local-only OSS contribution command center. Auto-refreshes the user's in-flight PR and issue state on invoke so conversations start with full context — no need to brief Claude on what's in flight. Helps the user find issues to contribute to on GitHub, builds per-repo dossiers of what each upstream expects (CLA, DCO, branch convention, AI policy, draft-first, review bots, issue templates), runs deterministic gates before any external action so AI-assisted contributions don't reach maintainers as slop. State is markdown-only: candidate files at ~/.contribute-system/candidates/, repo dossiers at ~/.contribute-system/research/, append-only event log at ~/.contribute-system/log.jsonl. No database, no cloud calls. Use when the user asks about their PRs / issues / contributions, wants to find new work to take on, claim an issue, build/refresh a repo's dossier, or draft a Design Issue or PR. Trigger with "/contribute", "what's my PR status", "find a contribution", "claim issue X", "draft a Design Issue for Y", "refresh dossier for Z".

Designscripts

architectural-analysis

Included

User-triggered deep architectural analysis of a codebase or scoped subtree across eight modes — information architecture, data flow, integration points, UI surfaces, interaction patterns, data model, control flow, and failure modes. This skill should be used when the user asks to "diagram this codebase," "map the architecture," "show the data flow," "give me an ERD," "trace control flow," "find the integration points," "verify the layout pattern," "audit the UX architecture," or any similar request whose primary deliverable is mermaid diagrams plus cited reports under docs/architecture/. Dispatches haiku/sonnet sub-agents in parallel for per-mode exploration, then verifies every citation mechanically before any node lands in a diagram. Not for one-off prose explanations of code (use code-explanation) or for high-level system design from scratch (use system-design).

Designscripts

mcp

Included

Model Context Protocol (MCP) server development and tool management. Languages: Python, TypeScript. Capabilities: build MCP servers, integrate external APIs, discover/execute MCP tools, manage multi-server configs, design agent-centric tools. Actions: create, build, integrate, discover, execute, configure MCP servers/tools. Keywords: MCP, Model Context Protocol, MCP server, MCP tool, stdio transport, SSE transport, tool discovery, resource provider, prompt template, external API integration, Gemini CLI MCP, Claude MCP, agent tools, tool execution, server config. Use when: building MCP servers, integrating external APIs as MCP tools, discovering available MCP tools, executing MCP capabilities, configuring multi-server setups, designing tools for AI agents.

Designscripts

react-native-skia

Included

Design, build, debug, and optimise high-polish animated graphics in React Native or Expo using @shopify/react-native-skia, Reanimated, and Gesture Handler. Use when the user wants canvas-driven UI, shaders, paths, rich text, image filters, sprite fields, Skottie, video frames, snapshots, web CanvasKit setup, or performance tuning for custom motion-heavy elements such as loaders, hero art, cards, charts, progress indicators, particle systems, or gesture-driven surfaces. Also use when the user asks for fluid, glow, glass, blob, parallax, 60fps/120fps, or GPU-friendly animated effects in React Native, even if they do not explicitly say "Skia". Do not use for ordinary form/layout work with standard views.

Designscripts

plaid

Included

Product Led AI Development — guides founders from idea to launched product. Six capabilities: Idea (discover a product idea), Validate (pressure-test the idea against fatal flaws, problem reality, competition, and 2-week MVP feasibility), Plan (vision intake + document generation), Design (translate image references into a design.md spec), Launch (go-to-market strategy), and Build (roadmap execution). Use when someone says "PLAID", "plaid idea", "help me find an idea", "product idea", "idea from my business", "idea from my expertise", "plaid validate", "validate my idea", "pressure-test", "is this idea good", "find fatal flaws", "validate the problem", "plan a product", "define my vision", "generate a PRD", "product strategy", "plaid design", "design from image", "translate image to design", "create design.md", "extract design tokens", "plaid launch", "go-to-market", "launch plan", "GTM strategy", "launch playbook", "plaid build", "build the app", "start building", or "execute the roadmap".

Designscripts

nextjs-framer-motion-animations

Included

Adds production-safe Motion for React or Framer Motion animations to Next.js apps, including reveal, hover and tap micro-interactions, whileInView, stagger, AnimatePresence, layout and layoutId transitions, reorder, scroll-linked UI, and lightweight route-content transitions. Use when the user asks to add, refactor, or debug Motion or Framer Motion in App Router or Pages Router codebases, especially around server/client boundaries, reduced motion, LazyMotion, bundle size, hydration, or route transitions. Avoid for GSAP-style timelines, WebGL or 3D scenes, heavy scroll storytelling, or CSS-only effects unless Motion is explicitly requested.

Designscripts