Code Review Claude Skills
2 030 code review skills from 387 authors. They read someone else's code and work through changes before those land. Half of them fit into 1 564 tokens or less — that is what one costs your context window when the agent loads it. 210 ship runnable scripts rather than instructions alone. 3 of them cannot work without an MCP server, most often rube. We also found 261 copies of these same skills sitting in other people's repositories — counted once here, not 261 times.
2 030 unique 387 authors 2 updated this month 280 from vendors
Orchestrate complete PRP workflow from feature request to pull request. Run create branch, create PRP, execute implementation, commit changes, and create PR in sequence. Use when implementing features using PRP methodology or when user requests full PRP workflow.
Android-specific code review workflow additions for Bitwarden Android. Provides change type refinements, checklist loading, and reference material organization. Complements bitwarden-code-reviewer agent's base review standards.
Systematically evaluate code changes for security, correctness, performance, and spec alignment. Use when reviewing PRs, assessing code quality, or verifying implementation against requirements.
Use when reviewing pull requests with comprehensive code analysis, incremental or full review options, and constructive feedback - provides thorough code reviews with severity ratings
Review code using Linus Torvalds' "good taste" philosophy. Eliminates defensive code, special cases, and deep nesting. Use when reviewing code quality, refactoring, or checking for code smells.
Review TypeScript and JavaScript code changes for compliance with Metabase coding standards, style violations, and code quality issues. Use when reviewing pull requests or diffs containing TypeScript/JavaScript code.
| AI-powered multi-agent code review. Simulates a team of Principal Engineers reviewing code from different perspectives. Use when asked to review code, check a PR, analyze changes, or perform code review.
Provides a structured 8-phase workflow for resolving GitHub issues in Claude Code. Covers fetching issue details, analyzing requirements, implementing solutions, verifying correctness, performing code review, committing changes, and creating pull requests. Use when user asks to resolve, implement, work on, fix, or close a GitHub issue, or references an issue URL or number for implementation.
Provides automated documentation updates by analyzing git changes between the current branch and the last release tag. Performs git diff analysis to identify modifications, then updates README.md, CHANGELOG.md following Keep a Changelog standard, and discovers documentation folders for contextual updates. Use when preparing a release, maintaining documentation sync, or before creating a pull request. Triggers on "update docs", "update changelog", "sync documentation", "update readme", "prepare release documentation".
Posts review findings from a JSON file as inline comments on a GitHub Pull Request, attaching each comment to its file and line. Use when you have a list/JSON of review findings (each with a file path, line number, and a message such as summary/failure_scenario) and want them published on a PR as inline review comments. Triggers include "post these review comments on the PR", "associate comments to files in the PR", "publish review findings to PR #N", or having a JSON array of {file, line, summary} to turn into PR comments.
Provides implementation patterns for Clean Architecture, Hexagonal Architecture (Ports & Adapters), and Domain-Driven Design in PHP 8.3+ with Symfony 7.x. Use when architecting enterprise PHP applications with entities/value objects/aggregates, refactoring legacy code to modern patterns, implementing domain-driven design with Symfony, or creating testable backends with clear separation of concerns.
Create GitHub Pull Request from specification using pull_request_template.md. Use when: spec needs to be converted to PR, spec is ready for review/merge, need to automate PR creation from specification file with template-based body and title.
Provides final code cleanup after task review approval. Removes debug logs, temporary comments, dead code, optimizes imports, and improves readability. Use when asked to clean up code, polish, finalize, tidy up, remove technical debt, or prepare code for completion after review. Not for refactoring logic or fixing bugs—focused solely on cosmetic and hygiene cleanup.
Provides Codex CLI delegation workflows for complex code generation and development tasks using OpenAI's GPT-5.3-codex models, including English prompt formulation, execution flags, sandbox modes, and safe result handling. Use when the user explicitly asks to use Codex for complex programming tasks such as code generation, refactoring, or architectural analysis. Triggers on "use codex", "delegate to codex", "run codex cli", "ask codex", "codex exec", "codex review".
Provides comprehensive code review capability for NestJS applications, analyzing controllers, services, modules, guards, interceptors, pipes, dependency injection, and database integration patterns. Use when reviewing NestJS code changes, before merging pull requests, after implementing new features, or for architecture validation. Triggers on "review NestJS code", "NestJS code review", "check my NestJS controller/service".
Provides comprehensive code review capability for Next.js applications, validates Server Components, Client Components, Server Actions, caching strategies, metadata, API routes, middleware, and performance patterns. Use when reviewing Next.js App Router code changes, before merging pull requests, after implementing new features, or for architecture validation. Triggers on "review Next.js code", "Next.js code review", "check my Next.js app".
Provides comprehensive code review capability for React applications, validates component architecture, hooks usage, React 19 patterns, state management, performance optimization, accessibility compliance, and TypeScript integration. Use when reviewing React code changes, before merging pull requests, after implementing new features, or for component architecture validation. Triggers on "review React code", "React code review", "check my React components".
Review code changes for bugs, security issues, performance problems, and style violations. Use when asked to review code, a PR, or recent changes.
Use when user asks for a sequenced learning path within a Buddhist tradition — 学修次第, 先学什么, 从哪入门, 下一步读什么, curriculum, 学习计划, 路径推荐. Differs from /compare-masters (parallel opinion) and /master-debate (adversarial dialectic) by being 纵向 / 时序: stage-by-stage plan keyed on tradition × level (L0-L3) → foundation → intermediate → advanced + blind spots. Trigger is planning intent — "禅宗对比" goes to /compare-masters; "禅宗从哪开始学" goes here.
Adversarially review something just built — presume it is broken and find where. Use after implementing a feature, finishing a build, or before shipping, or whenever ATLAS or Boss wants a hostile second opinion on a diff, a running app, or a whole codebase. Spawns clean-context reviewers with opposing lenses (correctness, security, empty-world) and reproduces every finding by running the target before believing it. Distinct from /code-review, which statically reads a diff and never runs the app.
Autonomous PR review — reads diff, cross-references knowledge base, posts inline comments, and leaves an overall verdict.
Expert guidance for PHP 8+ development, prioritizing code quality (SOLID, PSR standards), security practices, and testing requirements
Standard workflow to address pull request review comments in Cecil. Use when responding to review feedback, fixing requested changes, or preparing a clear reviewer reply with reproduction, fix, tests, and response.
> 原始人スタイル subagent への委譲判断ガイド。`genshijin-investigator` (コード位置特定)、 `genshijin-builder` (1-2ファイル編集)、`genshijin-reviewer` (diff レビュー) を inline作業 or vanilla `Explore` の代わりにスポーンするタイミングを示す。subagent 出力は原始人圧縮 → 主コンテキストに戻る tool-result が約60%縮小 → 長セッション持続。
한국 정부·공공기관 지원사업(창업지원, 사업화 자금, 입주공간, R&D, 바우처, 경진대회) 전수조사 및 프로젝트 적합성 판정 스킬. K-Startup·기업마당(bizinfo)·NIPA·KOCCA·SMTECH 공고를 크롤링해 현재 작업 폴더의 프로젝트(아이템) 프로필에 맞는 사업을 "즉시 지원 가능 / 요건 충족 시 / 변형하면 가능" 3단계로 분류하고 마감일·자격요건을 원문 검증해 보고서를 만든다. 사용자가 "지원사업 찾아줘", "정부지원", "창업지원 사업", "입주공간/사업화 자금 알아봐", "공모전/경진대회 조사", "우리 아이템에 맞는 지원사업", "K-Startup/기업마당 조사" 등을 요청하면 반드시 이 스킬을 사용한다. 이전에 조사한 적이 있는 프로젝트에서 "재조사", "새로 나온 지원사업 있나", "지난번 이후 뭐 올라왔나"를 물으면 diff 모드(증분 재조사)로 이 스킬을 사용한다. 특정 사이트를 지목하지 않아도 지원사업·보조금·정부과제 탐색 의도가 보이면 트리거된다. 단, 이미 운영 중인 소상공인·가게·점포·자영업자의 지원(소상공인 지원금, 정책자금 대출, 가게 시설개선, 소상공인24, 폐업·재기 지원)은 이 스킬이 아니라 sole-search 스킬을 사용한다. 신호가 섞이면(예: ''온라인 셀러 지원금'') 어느 쪽인지 한 번 묻는다. 사용자 신분보다 요청 목적이 우선이다 — 가게 사장이라도 신규 아이템 창업지원·R&D를 찾으면 ir-search. 한국 지원사업 전용.
Use when ranking backlogs, deciding what to do first based on effort vs impact (quick wins vs big bets), prioritizing feature roadmaps, triaging bugs or technical debt, allocating resources across initiatives, identifying low-hanging fruit, evaluating strategic options with 2x2 matrix, or when user mentions prioritization, quick wins, effort-impact matrix, high-impact low-effort, big bets, or asks "what should we do first?".
基于本地 git diff 的代码审查技能。用于在提交 PR 前先做自检评审，严格复用 pr-review 的三维度标准（代码质量标准、FastGPT 风格规范、常见问题清单），支持审查未暂存改动、已暂存改动、某次提交、或当前分支相对基线分支的全部改动。
C++ coding standards based on the C++ Core Guidelines (isocpp.github.io). Use when writing, reviewing, or refactoring C++ code to enforce modern, safe, and idiomatic practices.
Library-agnostic Flutter/Dart code review checklist covering widget best practices, state management patterns (BLoC, Riverpod, Provider, GetX, MobX, Signals), Dart idioms, performance, accessibility, security, and clean architecture.
Verification loop for Laravel projects: env checks, linting, static analysis, tests with coverage, security scans, and deployment readiness.
Write-time code quality enforcement using Plankton — auto-formatting, linting, and Claude-powered fixes on every file edit via hooks.
Verification loop for Spring Boot projects: build, static analysis, tests with coverage, security scans, and diff review before release or PR.
C++ coding standards based on the C++ Core Guidelines (isocpp.github.io). Use when writing, reviewing, or refactoring C++ code to enforce modern, safe, and idiomatic practices.
Verification loop for Django projects: migrations, linting, tests with coverage, security scans, and deployment readiness checks before release or PR.
Library-agnostic Flutter/Dart code review checklist covering widget best practices, state management patterns (BLoC, Riverpod, Provider, GetX, MobX, Signals), Dart idioms, performance, accessibility, security, and clean architecture.
Verification loop for Laravel projects: env checks, linting, static analysis, tests with coverage, security scans, and deployment readiness.
Write-time code quality enforcement using Plankton — auto-formatting, linting, and Claude-powered fixes on every file edit via hooks.
Verification loop for Spring Boot projects: build, static analysis, tests with coverage, security scans, and diff review before release or PR.
C++ coding standards based on the C++ Core Guidelines (isocpp.github.io). Use when writing, reviewing, or refactoring C++ code to enforce modern, safe, and idiomatic practices.
Verification loop for Django projects: migrations, linting, tests with coverage, security scans, and deployment readiness checks before release or PR.
Library-agnostic Flutter/Dart code review checklist covering widget best practices, state management patterns (BLoC, Riverpod, Provider, GetX, MobX, Signals), Dart idioms, performance, accessibility, security, and clean architecture.
Verification loop for Laravel projects: env checks, linting, static analysis, tests with coverage, security scans, and deployment readiness.
Write-time code quality enforcement using Plankton — auto-formatting, linting, and Claude-powered fixes on every file edit via hooks.
Verification loop for Spring Boot projects: build, static analysis, tests with coverage, security scans, and diff review before release or PR.
C++ coding standards based on the C++ Core Guidelines (isocpp.github.io). Use when writing, reviewing, or refactoring C++ code to enforce modern, safe, and idiomatic practices.
Verification loop for Django projects: migrations, linting, tests with coverage, security scans, and deployment readiness checks before release or PR.
Library-agnostic Flutter/Dart code review checklist covering widget best practices, state management patterns (BLoC, Riverpod, Provider, GetX, MobX, Signals), Dart idioms, performance, accessibility, security, and clean architecture.
Verification loop for Laravel projects: env checks, linting, static analysis, tests with coverage, security scans, and deployment readiness.