Agent skill for code-review-swarm - invoke with $agent-code-review-swarm
npx skills add https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry --skill agent-code-review-swarm
name: code-review-swarm
description: Deploy specialized AI agents to perform comprehensive, intelligent code reviews that go beyond traditional static analysis
tools: mcp__claude-flow__swarm_init, mcp__claude-flow__agent_spawn, mcp__claude-flow__task_orchestrate, Bash, Read, Write, TodoWrite
color: blue
type: development
capabilities:
priority: high
hooks:
pre: |
echo "Starting code-review-swarm..."
echo "Initializing multi-agent review system"
gh auth status || (echo "GitHub CLI not authenticated" && exit 1)
post: |
echo "Completed code-review-swarm"
echo "Review results posted to GitHub"
echo "Quality gates evaluated"
Deploy specialized AI agents to perform comprehensive, intelligent code reviews that go beyond traditional static analysis.
# Initialize code review swarm with gh CLI
# Get PR details
PR_DATA=$(gh pr view 123 --json files,additions,deletions,title,body)
PR_DIFF=$(gh pr diff 123)
# Initialize swarm with PR context
npx ruv-swarm github review-init \
--pr 123 \
--pr-data "$PR_DATA" \
--diff "$PR_DIFF" \
--agents "security,performance,style,architecture,accessibility" \
--depth comprehensive
# Post initial review status
gh pr comment 123 --body "🔍 Multi-agent code review initiated"
# Security-focused review with gh CLI
# Get changed files
CHANGED_FILES=$(gh pr view 123 --json files --jq '.files[].path')
# Run security review
SECURITY_RESULTS=$(npx ruv-swarm github review-security \
--pr 123 \
--files "$CHANGED_FILES" \
--check "owasp,cve,secrets,permissions" \
--suggest-fixes)
# Post security findings
if echo "$SECURITY_RESULTS" | grep -q "critical"; then
# Request changes for critical issues
gh pr review 123 --request-changes --body "$SECURITY_RESULTS"
# Add security label
gh pr edit 123 --add-label "security-review-required"
else
# Post as comment for non-critical issues
gh pr comment 123 --body "$SECURITY_RESULTS"
fi
# Performance analysis
npx ruv-swarm github review-performance \
--pr 123 \
--profile "cpu,memory,io" \
--benchmark-against main \
--suggest-optimizations
# Architecture review
npx ruv-swarm github review-architecture \
--pr 123 \
--check "patterns,coupling,cohesion,solid" \
--visualize-impact \
--suggest-refactoring
# .github$review-swarm.yml
version: 1
review:
auto-trigger: true
required-agents:
- security
- performance
- style
optional-agents:
- architecture
- accessibility
- i18n
thresholds:
security: block
performance: warn
style: suggest
rules:
security:
- no-eval
- no-hardcoded-secrets
- proper-auth-checks
performance:
- no-n-plus-one
- efficient-queries
- proper-caching
architecture:
- max-coupling: 5
- min-cohesion: 0.7
- follow-patterns
// Security checks performed
{
"checks": [
"SQL injection vulnerabilities",
"XSS attack vectors",
"Authentication bypasses",
"Authorization flaws",
"Cryptographic weaknesses",
"Dependency vulnerabilities",
"Secret exposure",
"CORS misconfigurations"
],
"actions": [
"Block PR on critical issues",
"Suggest secure alternatives",
"Add security test cases",
"Update security documentation"
]
}
// Performance analysis
{
"metrics": [
"Algorithm complexity",
"Database query efficiency",
"Memory allocation patterns",
"Cache utilization",
"Network request optimization",
"Bundle size impact",
"Render performance"
],
"benchmarks": [
"Compare with baseline",
"Load test simulations",
"Memory leak detection",
"Bottleneck identification"
]
}
// Style enforcement
{
"checks": [
"Code formatting",
"Naming conventions",
"Documentation standards",
"Comment quality",
"Test coverage",
"Error handling patterns",
"Logging standards"
],
"auto-fix": [
"Formatting issues",
"Import organization",
"Trailing whitespace",
"Simple naming issues"
]
}
// Architecture analysis
{
"patterns": [
"Design pattern adherence",
"SOLID principles",
"DRY violations",
"Separation of concerns",
"Dependency injection",
"Layer violations",
"Circular dependencies"
],
"metrics": [
"Coupling metrics",
"Cohesion scores",
"Complexity measures",
"Maintainability index"
]
}
# Review with full context
npx ruv-swarm github review-context \
--pr 123 \
--load-related-prs \
--analyze-impact \
--check-breaking-changes
# Learn from past reviews
npx ruv-swarm github review-learn \
--analyze-past-reviews \
--identify-patterns \
--improve-suggestions \
--reduce-false-positives
# Analyze related PRs together
npx ruv-swarm github review-batch \
--prs "123,124,125" \
--check-consistency \
--verify-integration \
--combined-impact
# .github$workflows$auto-review.yml
name: Automated Code Review
on:
pull_request:
types: [opened, synchronize]
jobs:
swarm-review:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions$checkout@v3
with:
fetch-depth: 0
- name: Setup GitHub CLI
run: echo "${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }}" | gh auth login --with-token
- name: Run Review Swarm
run: |
# Get PR context with gh CLI
PR_NUM=${{ github.event.pull_request.number }}
PR_DATA=$(gh pr view $PR_NUM --json files,title,body,labels)
# Run swarm review
REVIEW_OUTPUT=$(npx ruv-swarm github review-all \
--pr $PR_NUM \
--pr-data "$PR_DATA" \
--agents "security,performance,style,architecture")
# Post review results
echo "$REVIEW_OUTPUT" | gh pr review $PR_NUM --comment -F -
# Update PR status
if echo "$REVIEW_OUTPUT" | grep -q "approved"; then
gh pr review $PR_NUM --approve
elif echo "$REVIEW_OUTPUT" | grep -q "changes-requested"; then
gh pr review $PR_NUM --request-changes -b "See review comments above"
fi
// Custom review triggers
{
"triggers": {
"high-risk-files": {
"paths": ["**$auth/**", "**$payment/**"],
"agents": ["security", "architecture"],
"depth": "comprehensive"
},
"performance-critical": {
"paths": ["**$api/**", "**$database/**"],
"agents": ["performance", "database"],
"benchmarks": true
},
"ui-changes": {
"paths": ["**$components/**", "**$styles/**"],
"agents": ["accessibility", "style", "i18n"],
"visual-tests": true
}
}
}
# Generate contextual review comments with gh CLI
# Get PR diff with context
PR_DIFF=$(gh pr diff 123 --color never)
PR_FILES=$(gh pr view 123 --json files)
# Generate review comments
COMMENTS=$(npx ruv-swarm github review-comment \
--pr 123 \
--diff "$PR_DIFF" \
--files "$PR_FILES" \
--style "constructive" \
--include-examples \
--suggest-fixes)
# Post comments using gh CLI
echo "$COMMENTS" | jq -c '.[]' | while read -r comment; do
FILE=$(echo "$comment" | jq -r '.path')
LINE=$(echo "$comment" | jq -r '.line')
BODY=$(echo "$comment" | jq -r '.body')
# Create review with inline comments
gh api \
--method POST \
$repos/:owner/:repo$pulls/123$comments \
-f path="$FILE" \
-f line="$LINE" \
-f body="$BODY" \
-f commit_id="$(gh pr view 123 --json headRefOid -q .headRefOid)"
done
<!-- Security Issue Template -->
🔒 **Security Issue: [Type]**
**Severity**: 🔴 Critical / 🟡 High / 🟢 Low
**Description**:
[Clear explanation of the security issue]
**Impact**:
[Potential consequences if not addressed]
**Suggested Fix**:
[Code example of the fix]
**References**:
- [OWASP Guide](link)
- [Security Best Practices](link)
# Manage review comments efficiently
npx ruv-swarm github review-comments \
--pr 123 \
--group-by "agent,severity" \
--summarize \
--resolve-outdated
# Required status checks
protection_rules:
required_status_checks:
contexts:
- "review-swarm$security"
- "review-swarm$performance"
- "review-swarm$architecture"
# Define quality gates
npx ruv-swarm github quality-gates \
--define '{
"security": {"threshold": "no-critical"},
"performance": {"regression": "<5%"},
"coverage": {"minimum": "80%"},
"architecture": {"complexity": "<10"}
}'
# Track review effectiveness
npx ruv-swarm github review-metrics \
--period 30d \
--metrics "issues-found,false-positives,fix-rate" \
--export-dashboard
# Train on your codebase
npx ruv-swarm github review-train \
--learn-patterns \
--adapt-to-style \
--improve-accuracy
// Create custom review agent
class CustomReviewAgent {
async review(pr) {
const issues = [];
// Custom logic here
if (await this.checkCustomRule(pr)) {
issues.push({
severity: 'warning',
message: 'Custom rule violation',
suggestion: 'Fix suggestion'
});
}
return issues;
}
}
# Orchestrate complex reviews
npx ruv-swarm github review-orchestrate \
--strategy "risk-based" \
--allocate-time-budget \
--prioritize-critical
# Auth system changes
npx ruv-swarm github review-init \
--pr 456 \
--agents "security,authentication,audit" \
--depth "maximum" \
--require-security-approval
# Database optimization
npx ruv-swarm github review-init \
--pr 789 \
--agents "performance,database,caching" \
--benchmark \
--profile
# New component library
npx ruv-swarm github review-init \
--pr 321 \
--agents "accessibility,style,i18n,docs" \
--visual-regression \
--component-tests
# Launch review dashboard
npx ruv-swarm github review-dashboard \
--real-time \
--show "agent-activity,issue-trends,fix-rates"
# Generate review reports
npx ruv-swarm github review-report \
--format "markdown" \
--include "summary,details,trends" \
--email-stakeholders
See also: swarm-pr.md, workflow-automation.md
Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation
Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements
Execute git commit with conventional commit message analysis, intelligent staging, and message generation. Use when user asks to commit changes, create a git commit, or mentions "/commit". Supports: (1) Auto-detecting type and scope from changes, (2) Generating conventional commit messages from diff, (3) Interactive commit with optional type/scope/description overrides, (4) Intelligent file staging for logical grouping
Comprehensive GitHub code review with AI-powered swarm coordination
Behavioral guidelines to reduce common LLM coding mistakes. Use when writing, reviewing, or refactoring code to avoid overcomplication, make surgical changes, surface assumptions, and define verifiable success criteria.
Use this skill to review code. It supports both local changes (staged or working tree) and remote Pull Requests (by ID or URL). It focuses on correctness, maintainability, and adherence to project standards.
Refactor bloated AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, or similar agent instruction files to follow progressive disclosure principles. Splits monolithic files into organized, linked documentation.
Create high-quality git commits: review/stage intended changes, split into logical commits, and write clear commit messages (including Conventional Commits). Use when the user asks to commit, craft a commit message, stage changes, or split work into multiple commits.
Take majiayu000/agent-code-review-swarm 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.
The instructions reference npx.
Without those the skill loads but fails at the first command.