mcpbeat Sign in

Structured Code Review Agent Skill

Performs a structured five-stage code review covering requirements compliance, correctness, code quality, testing, and security/performance. Each stage uses targeted checklists and categorized feedback (Blocker/Major/Minor/Nit) with actionable suggestions and rationale. Use when the user asks for code review, PR feedback, pull request review, or wants their code checked for bugs, style issues, or vulnerabilities — triggered by phrases like "review my code", "check this PR", "review my changes", "pull request review", or "code feedback".

1k tokens
context cost
the whole folder, loaded on every use
1
files
instructions only
0
copies elsewhere
how many repositories repackaged it
1416
stars on the repo
on the repository, not the skill itself

Install

one command, takes just this skill from the repository
npx skills add https://github.com/rohitg00/skillkit --skill structured-code-review

The instruction itself

13 sections, as written by the author

Structured Code Review

You are performing a structured, multi-stage code review. This methodology ensures thorough review while providing actionable, constructive feedback.

Core Principle

Review in stages. Each stage has a specific focus. Don't mix concerns.

A structured review catches more issues and provides better feedback than an unstructured scan.

Review Stages

Stage 1: Requirements Compliance

First, verify the code meets its requirements.

Checklist:

  • [ ] Implements stated requirements
  • [ ] Handles specified edge cases
  • [ ] No scope creep (unexpected additions)
  • [ ] No missing functionality

Feedback at this stage:

  • "This doesn't appear to handle the case when X is empty"
  • "The requirement specified Y, but this implements Z"
  • "This adds feature F which wasn't requested - is that intentional?"

Stage 2: Correctness

Next, verify the code works correctly.

Checklist:

  • [ ] Logic is sound
  • [ ] No obvious bugs
  • [ ] Error paths are handled
  • [ ] No unfinished code (TODOs without tickets)

Feedback at this stage:

  • "This will throw if user is null"
  • "The loop exits early before processing all items"
  • "What happens when the API call fails?"

Stage 3: Code Quality

Then, evaluate code quality and maintainability.

Checklist:

  • [ ] Clear naming
  • [ ] Reasonable function/method length
  • [ ] No unnecessary complexity
  • [ ] Follows project conventions
  • [ ] Appropriate abstractions

Feedback at this stage:

  • "Could you rename data to userProfile for clarity?"
  • "This function is doing three things - consider splitting"
  • "We use camelCase for variables in this project"

Stage 4: Testing

Evaluate test coverage and quality.

Checklist:

  • [ ] New code has tests
  • [ ] Tests cover main paths and edge cases
  • [ ] Tests are readable and maintainable
  • [ ] Tests don't test implementation details

Feedback at this stage:

  • "Please add a test for the error case"
  • "This test will break if we change the implementation"
  • "Consider using a parameterized test for these cases"

Stage 5: Security & Performance

Finally, check for security and performance concerns.

Checklist:

  • [ ] No SQL injection, XSS, etc.
  • [ ] Secrets not exposed
  • [ ] No obvious N+1 queries
  • [ ] No unnecessary computation
  • [ ] Sensitive data handled correctly

Feedback at this stage:

  • "This input should be sanitized before use"
  • "Consider adding an index for this query"
  • "This API key should come from environment variables"

Writing Good Feedback

Feedback Levels

| Level | When to Use | Example |

|-------|-------------|---------|

| Blocker | Must fix before merge | "Security: This allows SQL injection" |

| Major | Should fix, but not critical | "This will fail for empty arrays" |

| Minor | Suggestion, nice to have | "Consider renaming for clarity" |

| Nit | Trivial, stylistic | "Extra blank line here" |

Constructive Feedback Template

[Level] [Category]: [Issue]

**What:** [Describe the specific issue]
**Why:** [Explain why it matters]
**Suggestion:** [Offer a specific improvement]

Example:

[Major] Correctness: Null reference possible

**What:** `user.email` is accessed without checking if user exists
**Why:** This will throw TypeError when user is not found
**Suggestion:** Add `if (!user) return null;` before accessing properties

Review Checklist Summary

## Review: [PR Title]

### Stage 1: Requirements
- [ ] Implements requirements
- [ ] Handles edge cases
- [ ] Appropriate scope

### Stage 2: Correctness
- [ ] Logic is sound
- [ ] No bugs
- [ ] Errors handled

### Stage 3: Quality
- [ ] Readable
- [ ] Follows conventions
- [ ] Maintainable

### Stage 4: Testing
- [ ] Has tests
- [ ] Tests are good

### Stage 5: Security/Performance
- [ ] No vulnerabilities
- [ ] No performance issues

### Verdict: [ ] Approve [ ] Request Changes [ ] Comment

Integration with Other Skills

  • planning/verification-gates: Review is a key gate
  • testing/test-patterns: Evaluate test quality
  • testing/anti-patterns: Spot testing issues

Other skills for the same job

different authors, same section of the catalogue
Receiving Code Review
by ZhanlinCui
×7

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

2k tokens
Requesting Code Review
by ZhanlinCui
×6

Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements

2k tokens
Git Commit
by github
vendor ×3

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

799 tokens
Github Code Review
by ComeOnOliver
×3

Comprehensive GitHub code review with AI-powered swarm coordination

13k tokens
Karpathy Guidelines
by hyyhf
×3

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.

629 tokens
Code Reviewer
by google-gemini
vendor ×2

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.

795 tokens
Agent MD Refactor
by softaworks
×2

Refactor bloated AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, or similar agent instruction files to follow progressive disclosure principles. Splits monolithic files into organized, linked documentation.

4k tokens
Commit Work
by softaworks
×2

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.

2k tokens

How to use it

Copy the folder

Take rohitg00/structured-code-review from the repository into ~/.claude/skills for personal use, or into .claude/skills inside a project.

Check the name does not clash

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.