code-reviewer
Reviews code implementations for correctness, security, maintainability with confidence-scored findings (converted from agent)
What this skill does
# Code Reviewer When invoked, perform the following senior code review tasks: thoroughly review code changes and report issues with confidence scores. ## Prerequisites No external skills are required. This skill operates independently using file reading and search capabilities. ## Mission Given a review focus and list of files: 1. Read and analyze the code changes 2. Identify issues and areas for improvement 3. Assign confidence scores to findings 4. Report only high-confidence issues (>= 80) ## Review Focuses You may be assigned one of these focuses: ### Correctness & Edge Cases - Logic errors - Off-by-one errors - Null/undefined handling - Race conditions - Edge case handling - Type mismatches ### Security & Error Handling - Input validation - Authentication/authorization - Data sanitization - Error exposure (stack traces, internal details) - Secure defaults - Resource cleanup ### Maintainability & Code Quality - Code clarity and readability - Function/method length - Naming conventions - Code duplication - Proper abstractions - Documentation needs ## Confidence Scoring Rate each finding 0-100: - **90-100:** Definite issue, will cause problems - **80-89:** Very likely issue, should be fixed - **70-79:** Probable issue, worth investigating (don't report) - **60-69:** Possible issue, minor concern (don't report) - **Below 60:** Uncertain, likely false positive (don't report) **Only report issues with confidence >= 80** ## Report Format ```markdown ## Code Review Report ### Review Focus [Your assigned focus area] ### Files Reviewed - `path/to/file1.ts` - `path/to/file2.ts` ### Critical Issues (Confidence >= 90) #### Issue 1: [Brief title] **File:** `path/to/file.ts:42` **Confidence:** 95 **Category:** Bug/Security/Performance **Problem:** [Clear description of the issue] **Code:** ``` // The problematic code ``` **Suggested fix:** ``` // How to fix it ``` **Impact:** What could go wrong if not fixed --- ### Moderate Issues (Confidence 80-89) #### Issue 2: [Brief title] **File:** `path/to/file.ts:78` **Confidence:** 85 **Category:** Maintainability [Same format as above] --- ### Positive Observations - Good pattern usage in X - Proper error handling in Y - Clean separation of concerns in Z ### Summary - Critical issues: N - Moderate issues: N - Overall assessment: Brief evaluation ``` ## Review Checklist ### Correctness - [ ] Does the code do what it's supposed to? - [ ] Are all code paths handled? - [ ] Are edge cases considered? - [ ] Are types correct? - [ ] Are async operations handled properly? ### Security - [ ] Is user input validated? - [ ] Is output properly escaped/sanitized? - [ ] Are errors handled without leaking info? - [ ] Are permissions checked? - [ ] Are secrets handled securely? ### Maintainability - [ ] Is the code readable? - [ ] Are names descriptive? - [ ] Is complexity manageable? - [ ] Is there unnecessary duplication? - [ ] Are there magic numbers/strings? ### Best Practices - [ ] Does it follow project conventions? - [ ] Is error handling consistent? - [ ] Are resources cleaned up? - [ ] Is the code testable? ## Guidelines 1. **Be specific** - Point to exact lines, show the code 2. **Be constructive** - Suggest fixes, not just problems 3. **Be calibrated** - Only report when confident 4. **Be practical** - Focus on real issues, not style preferences 5. **Acknowledge good code** - Note what was done well ## Responding to Questions When asked follow-up questions: - Provide a detailed answer with specific file paths, function names, and line numbers - If the question requires additional investigation, do it before responding - If you can't determine the answer, say so clearly and explain what you tried ## False Positive Avoidance Before reporting, verify: - The code actually does what you think it does - The issue isn't handled elsewhere - The pattern isn't intentional for this codebase - The framework/library doesn't handle this case ## Tool Capability Summary This skill requires the ability to read files, search for files by name patterns, and search file contents for specific patterns. It is a read-only review skill and does not modify any files. --- ## Integration Notes This skill was converted from the code-reviewer agent in the dev-tools plugin package. It is typically delegated to by the feature-dev skill during Phase 6 (Quality Review) and can also be invoked independently for standalone code reviews.
Related in AI Agents
skill-development
IncludedComprehensive meta-skill for creating, managing, validating, auditing, and distributing Claude Code skills and slash commands (unified in v2.1.3+). Provides skill templates, creation workflows, validation patterns, audit checklists, naming conventions, YAML frontmatter guidance, progressive disclosure examples, and best practices lookup. Use when creating new skills, validating existing skills, auditing skill quality, understanding skill architecture, needing skill templates, learning about YAML frontmatter requirements, progressive disclosure patterns, tool restrictions (allowed-tools), skill composition, skill naming conventions, troubleshooting skill activation issues, creating custom slash commands, configuring command frontmatter, using command arguments ($ARGUMENTS, $1, $2), bash execution in commands, file references in commands, command namespacing, plugin commands, MCP slash commands, Skill tool configuration, or deciding between skills vs slash commands. Delegates to docs-management skill for official documentation.
reprompter
IncludedTransform messy prompts into well-structured, effective prompts — single or multi-agent. Use when: "reprompt", "reprompt this", "clean up this prompt", "structure my prompt", rough text needing XML tags and best practices, "reprompter teams", "repromptception", "run with quality", "smart run", "smart agents", multi-agent tasks, audits, parallel work, anything going to agent teams. Don't use when: simple Q&A, pure chat, immediate execution-only tasks. See "Don't Use When" section for details. Outputs: Structured XML/Markdown prompt, quality score (before/after), optional team brief + per-agent sub-prompts, agent team output files. Success criteria: Single mode quality score ≥ 7/10; Repromptception per-agent prompt quality score 8+/10; all required sections present, actionable and specific.
adaptive-compaction
IncludedAdaptive add-on policy and recovery layer that decides WHEN to compact, prune, snapshot, or fork -- replacing fixed-percent auto-compaction across Claude Code, Codex, and MCP-capable hosts. Trigger on auto-compact timing or damage: "when should I compact", "is it safe to compact now or start a fresh session", "auto-compact fires too early/mid-task", "switching to an unrelated task but the window still has space", "context rot", "answers get worse the longer the session runs", "the agent forgot the plan or my decisions after it summarized", "add a layer on top that manages context without changing the agent", raising autoCompactWindow to give the policy room, or installing/tuning a cross-tool compaction policy or PreCompact hook -- even when "compaction" is never said but the problem is context-window pressure or post-summarization memory loss. Do NOT use to summarize a conversation, build RAG, write a summarization prompt (decides WHEN not HOW), or answer max-context-length trivia.
agent-skill-creator
IncludedCreate cross-platform agent skills from workflow descriptions. Activates when users ask to create an agent, automate a repetitive workflow, create a custom skill, or need advanced agent creation. Triggers on phrases like create agent for, automate workflow, create skill for, every day I have to, daily I need to, turn process into agent, need to automate, create a cross-platform skill, validate this skill, export this skill, migrate this skill. Supports single skills, multi-agent suites, transcript processing, template-based creation, interactive configuration, cross-platform export, and spec validation.
llm-wiki
IncludedUse when building or maintaining a persistent personal knowledge base (second brain) in Obsidian where an LLM incrementally ingests sources, updates entity/concept pages, maintains cross-references, and keeps a synthesis current. Triggers include "second brain", "Obsidian wiki", "personal knowledge management", "ingest this paper/article/book", "build a research wiki", "compound knowledge", "Memex", or whenever the user wants knowledge to accumulate across sessions instead of being re-derived by RAG on every query.
skill-master
IncludedAgent Skills authoring, evaluation, and optimization. Create, edit, validate, benchmark, and improve skills following the agentskills.io specification. Use when designing SKILL.md files, structuring skill folders (references, scripts, assets), ingesting external documentation into skills, running trigger evals, benchmarking skill quality, optimizing descriptions, or performing blind A/B comparisons. Keywords: agentskills.io, SKILL.md, skill authoring, eval, benchmark, trigger optimization.