exploration-review
Interactive code review through conversation. HOUSTON guides review, spawns specialized agents, and helps create Beads for issues found.
What this skill does
# /exploration-review - Interactive Code Review Review code through conversation. This is collaborative analysis, not a report dump. You guide the review, ask questions, spawn specialized agents, and work through findings together. ## The Process 1. **Understand scope** - What code to review? Recent changes, specific files, or feature area? 2. **Ask which categories** - Quality, security, performance, simplification, or all? 3. **Spawn relevant agents** - Run in background while you talk 4. **Work through findings** - Discuss issues, get context, prioritize 5. **Create report** - Summarize findings by priority 6. **Offer Beads** - Ask if user wants to track issues ## Starting the Review ### 1. Determine Scope Ask what to review: - Recent changes (git diff) - Specific files or directories - A feature or component - Code from last /mission ### 2. Select Categories Use AskUserQuestion: ``` "Which areas should I focus on?" Options: - Quality (readability, structure, patterns) - Security (secrets, injection, validation) - Performance (algorithms, queries, optimization) - Simplification (dead code, over-engineering, DRY) - All of the above ``` ### 3. Spawn Agents Based on selection, spawn with `run_in_background: true`: | Category | Agent | Focus | |----------|-------|-------| | Quality | `space-agents:review-quality` | Readability, naming, complexity, patterns | | Security | `space-agents:review-security` | Secrets, injection, auth, OWASP | | Performance | `space-agents:review-performance` | Algorithms, queries, caching, bundle | | Simplification | `space-agents:review-code-simplifier` | Dead code, over-engineering, DRY, bloat | Continue conversation while agents work. Check results with `TaskOutput block: false`. ## Working Through Findings ### Priority Levels Categorize all findings: | Priority | Meaning | Action | |----------|---------|--------| | **Critical** | Security vulnerability, data loss risk, broken functionality | Must fix before merge | | **Warning** | Code smell, maintainability issue, potential bug | Should fix | | **Suggestion** | Style improvement, optimization opportunity | Consider improving | ### Discussion Flow For each finding: 1. **Present the issue** - What, where, why it matters 2. **Get context** - Ask if there's a reason for current approach 3. **Discuss fix** - Agree on solution or accept as-is 4. **Categorize** - Confirm priority level **Red flags to watch for:** - User dismissing Critical issues - push back - "It works so it's fine" - explain long-term cost - Over-engineering suggestions - keep it practical ## Your Role - **Ask questions** - Understand context before judging - **Have opinions** - Recommend priorities, push back on bad patterns - **Suggest agents, don't auto-spawn** - Always ask first - **Be constructive** - Acknowledge what's done well, not just problems - **Keep talking** - Never wait silently for agent results ## Available Agents Spawn with `run_in_background: true`, continue conversation immediately: - `space-agents:review-quality` - Code quality and maintainability - `space-agents:review-security` - Security vulnerabilities and risks - `space-agents:review-performance` - Performance issues and optimizations - `space-agents:review-code-simplifier` - Dead code, over-engineering, DRY violations ## AskUserQuestion (Required) **Always use `AskUserQuestion`** for every question in review. Prefer multiple choice when you can anticipate likely answers. ## Output When review is complete: ### 1. Summary Report Present findings organized by priority: ``` ## Review Summary ### Critical (must fix) - [Issue with file:line reference] ### Warnings (should fix) - [Issue with file:line reference] ### Suggestions (consider) - [Issue with file:line reference] ### What's Good - [Positive observations] ``` ### 2. Offer Beads Ask user: ``` AskUserQuestion: "Want to create Beads to track these issues?" Options: - "Yes, create bugs for Critical/Warning" - Track issues that need fixing - "Yes, create tasks for all" - Track everything including suggestions - "No, I'll handle it" - Skip Bead creation ``` **If creating Beads:** - Use `bd create --type=bug` for Critical/Warning issues - Use `bd create --type=task` for Suggestions - Include file:line references in description
Related in Code Review
gstack
IncludedFast headless browser for QA testing and site dogfooding. Navigate pages, interact with elements, verify state, diff before/after, take annotated screenshots, test responsive layouts, forms, uploads, dialogs, and capture bug evidence. Use when asked to open or test a site, verify a deployment, dogfood a user flow, or file a bug with screenshots. (gstack)
startup-due-diligence
IncludedLegal due diligence review for seed-stage and Series A startups (US, Delaware C-Corp focus). Supports both investor and founder perspectives. Capabilities include: (1) Interactive document review and issue spotting; (2) Document request list generation; (3) Cap table and SAFE/convertible note analysis; (4) Red flag identification with severity ratings; (5) Diligence report generation. TRIGGERS: due diligence, DD, startup investment, cap table review, Series A, seed round, investor diligence, legal review startup, SAFE analysis, convertible note, 409A, founder vesting.
interview-master
IncludedThis skill should be used when the user asks to "generate interview questions", "prepare for interview", "optimize resume", "conduct mock interview", "analyze git commits for resume", "generate resume from code", "review my resume", or mentions interview preparation, career assistance, or extracting project experience from git history. Provides comprehensive interview and career development guidance for both job seekers and interviewers.
fix-issue
IncludedFixes GitHub issues using parallel analysis agents for root cause investigation, code exploration, and regression detection. Reads issue context from gh CLI, searches codebase and memory for related patterns, generates a fix with tests, and links the resolution back to the issue via PR. Includes prevention analysis to avoid recurrence. Use when debugging errors, resolving regressions, fixing bugs, or triaging issues.
sf-apex
IncludedGenerates and reviews Salesforce Apex code with 150-point scoring. TRIGGER when: user writes, reviews, or fixes Apex classes, triggers, test classes, batch/queueable/schedulable jobs, or touches .cls/.trigger files. DO NOT TRIGGER when: LWC JavaScript (use sf-lwc), Flow XML (use sf-flow), SOQL-only queries (use sf-soql), or non-Salesforce code.
swift-development
IncludedComprehensive Swift development for building, testing, and deploying iOS/macOS applications. Use when Claude needs to: (1) Build Swift packages or Xcode projects from command line, (2) Run tests with XCTest or Swift Testing framework, (3) Manage iOS simulators with simctl, (4) Handle code signing, provisioning profiles, and app distribution, (5) Format or lint Swift code with SwiftFormat/SwiftLint, (6) Work with Swift Package Manager (SPM), (7) Implement Swift 6 concurrency patterns (async/await, actors, Sendable), (8) Create SwiftUI views with MVVM architecture, (9) Set up Core Data or SwiftData persistence, or any other Swift/iOS/macOS development tasks.