Deep code review with web research to verify against latest ecosystem. Use when user says 'double check against latest', 'verify versions', 'check security', 'review against docs', or needs deep analysis beyond automatic quality hook.
npx skills add https://github.com/ComeOnOliver/skillshub --skill quality-reviewer
>- Generate ONE reviewer-defensible, implementable research idea with a concrete method and falsification plan from a stated research direction. Use when the user asks for a research idea, novelty analysis, bottleneck diagnosis, or paper-shape suggestion. Skip code review, debugging, and unconstrained brainstorming without research context.
>- Audits production source code files based on the strategy in workspace/plan.json. Use when a review plan exists and you need to perform static analysis and deep-dive reviews of targeted files. Don't use for planning, deduplicating, or writing patches.
Generate self-contained HTML pages that visually explain systems, data stories, investigations, editorial workflows, and code changes. Use when the user asks for a diagram, architecture overview, diff review, plan review, project recap, source map, comparison table, timeline, or any visual explanation of technical or editorial concepts. Also use proactively when about to render a complex ASCII table (4+ rows or 3+ columns) — present it as a styled HTML page instead. Adapted from nicobailon/visual-explainer with journalism, newsroom, and academic design sensibilities.
Use when reverse-engineering a binary or firmware — static triage + decompilation (Ghidra/IDA/Binary Ninja), dynamic instrumentation (GDB/Frida 17/angr), anti-reversing & packer bypass, OLLVM/VM deobfuscation, UEFI/BIOS RE & Secure Boot research, patch-diffing for n-days
Use when building a feature, refactoring, fixing a complex bug, changing architecture, or starting any non-trivial coding task. 12-stage verified dev workflow from research to deploy.
Multi-conversation methodology for iterative stateful work with context accumulation. Use when users request work that spans multiple sessions (research, debugging, refactoring, feature development), need to build on past progress, explicitly mention iterative work, work logs, project knowledge, or cross-conversation learning.
> Use before you shorten, compress, or rewrite the BODY of an existing SKILL.md or agent .md — the moment you are about to cut text to reduce length. First inventory the file's operational anchors (exact code / command / API snippets, fail-closed workflow guards, and rule / threshold statements), preserve every one, then judge the rewrite by expected downstream task cost (exploration, debugging, recovery tokens) rather than by the resulting line count. A shorter skill that strips an anchor makes the agent MORE expensive per task, so length is never the objective and rewrite is not compression. Backed by Preserving Operational Anchors When Compressing Agent Instructions (arxiv 2606.09421v2). Triggers on shortening or refactoring a skill or agent body.
Recipes and patterns for Claude Code multi-agent swarms. Use when building parallel specialist reviews, pipeline workflows, self-organizing swarms, research-then-implement flows, plan approval gates, coordinated multi-file refactoring, or any divide-and-conquer orchestration pattern requiring TeamCreate, TaskCreate, SendMessage, or Agent tool coordination.
Take comeonoliver/quality-reviewer from the repository into ~/.claude/skills for personal
use, or into .claude/skills inside a project.
The agent identifies a skill by the name field in its header. Two skills with the
same name cannot sit side by side — one of them will be ignored.