Code Review
863 skills.
Browse
121-java-object-oriented-designjabrenaUse when reviewing, improving, or refactoring Java object-oriented design, including applying SOLID, DRY, or YAGNI; improving classes and interfaces; correcting encapsulation, inheritance, or polymorphism; resolving God Class, Feature Envy, or Data Clumps; and improving object creation, methods, or exception contracts. Triggers include review Java OOD, refactor Java OOD, improve Java OOD, fix OOP misuse, and identify Java code smells. Part of Plinth Toolkitsf-industry-commoncore-callable-apexjaganproSalesforce Industries Common Core (OmniStudio/Vlocity) Apex callable generation and review with 120-point scoring. TRIGGER when: user creates or reviews System.Callable classes, migrates `VlocityOpenInterface` / `VlocityOpenInterface2`, or builds Industries callable extensions used by OmniStudio, Integration Procedures, or DataRaptors. DO NOT TRIGGER when: generic Apex classes/triggers (use sf-apex), building Integration Procedures (use sf-industry-commoncore-integration-procedure), authoring Omsf-industry-commoncore-omnistudio-analyzejaganproCross-cutting OmniStudio analysis skill for namespace detection, dependency visualization, and impact analysis across OmniScripts, FlexCards, Integration Procedures, and Data Mappers. TRIGGER when: user asks about OmniStudio dependencies, wants namespace detection (Core vs vlocity_cmt vs vlocity_ins), needs impact analysis, or requests dependency diagrams. DO NOT TRIGGER when: authoring OmniScripts (use sf-industry-commoncore-omniscript), building FlexCards (use sf-industry-commoncore-flexcard),codex-reviewjezwebRun an independent code review using the OpenAI Codex CLI in headless mode. Gets a second opinion from a different model family (the current Codex models) on recent changes, a PR, a commit, or the whole app — covering bugs, regressions, security, data consistency, UX/state bugs, performance risks, and testing gaps. Saves a severity-prioritised report to .jez/reviews/. Triggers: 'codex review', 'review with codex', 'independent code review', 'what does codex think', 'get codex to review'.fork-disciplinejezwebAudit and enforce the core/client boundary in multi-client projects. Detects where shared platform code is tangled with client-specific code, finds hardcoded client checks, config files that replace instead of merge, scattered client code, migration conflicts, and missing extension points. Produces a boundary map, violation report, and refactoring plan. Optionally generates FORK.md documentation and restructuring scripts. Triggers: 'fork discipline', 'check the boundary', 'is this core or clientchinese-code-reviewjnmetacode中文 review 沟通参考——话术模板、分级标注（必须修复/建议修改/仅供参考）、国内团队常见反模式应对。仅在用户显式 /chinese-code-review 时调用，不要根据上下文自动触发。receiving-code-reviewjnmetacode收到代码审查反馈后、实施建议之前使用，尤其当反馈不明确或技术上有疑问时——需要技术严谨性和验证，而非敷衍附和或盲目执行requesting-code-reviewjnmetacode完成任务、实现重要功能或合并前使用，用于验证工作成果是否符合要求zero-tech-debtjnsahajRework a change as if the intended UX and architecture existed from day one, deleting compatibility cruft and accidental complexity.architectjsmastery-proThink through what you are about to build like a senior engineer before writing any code. Surfaces decisions, aligns on language, and produces a clear implementation plan you confirm before anything starts.reviewjsmastery-proAfter building a feature, verify it matches what was planned, respects the system architecture and design standards, and is ready for production. Reports issues clearly so the developer decides what to fix.deepenjuliusbrusseeOptional design-improvement pass for when you have spare usage to drain. Finds the shallowest modules in the code the spec touches, researches a deeper design, and proposes refactors that shrink interfaces and hide decisions — behavior held constant, tests green before and after. Proposes §I/§V/§T edits, never silent rewrites. Triggers when the user says "deepen this", "improve the design", "this module feels shallow", "pull complexity down", "use spare budget on the codebase", or invokes /ck:dereviewjuliusbrusseeAdversarial senior review of the spec before any code is written. Constructs a skeptical reviewer whose authority comes from the codebase, §R research, and live best-practice — then tries to REFUTE the spec, not rubber-stamp it. Every finding cites evidence (file:line or source); unverifiable ones are flagged. Survivors harden §V; the run ends in an explicit go / no-go gate. Triggers before building anything high-blast-radius, when the user says "review the spec", "red-team this", "is this plan architecture-decisionjwyniaSystematically evaluate architecture decisions, document trade-offs, and select appropriate patterns. This skill should be used when the user asks about 'architecture decision', 'ADR', 'design pattern selection', 'technology choice', or needs to evaluate architectural trade-offs. Keywords: architecture, ADR, patterns, trade-offs, technical debt, quality attributes, decision record.code-reviewjwyniaProvide structured code review guidance for catching defects and improving quality. This skill should be used when the user asks to 'review this code', 'check for issues', 'PR review', 'code quality check', or wants systematic code evaluation. Keywords: code review, PR, pull request, quality, defects, security, maintainability, performance.system-designjwyniaDiagnose design problems and guide architecture decisions for solo developersverifykirkchenUse when validating implementation against spec artifacts before archive — not for design, planning, or implementationpr-reviewkirkchenUse when reviewing a PR/MR diff for security, logic, performance, cross-file impact, test coverage, or spec compliance findings. NOT for writing PR descriptions, design reviews requiring business judgment, implementation work, release notes, or deep CVE/supply-chain audits.self-reviewkirkchenUse when doing dev-stage self-review on the current branch before pushing or opening a PR — runs an auto-loop of codex review (cross-model, OpenAI) + per-finding fix + re-review until findings converge or stop conditions fire. Codex follows pr-review's multi-role methodology (security / staff-engineer / sdet / spec-auditor). Triggers — 'self review', 'self-review', '自己 review', '自我 review', 'cross-model review', 'pre-push review', 'review and fix my branch'. NOT for live PR review with sticky/incodebase-refactoringkucherenkoThree-part workflow to improve overall codebase health with jscpd — find and fix duplicated code, find and remove or refactor dead code, then find and simplify the largest/most complex files. Starts from --dashboard/--health to prioritize and ends by re-measuring the score.backend-code-reviewlanggeniusUse only when the user explicitly requests a review or audit of backend code under `api/`. Supports pending-change, file-focused, and pasted-diff reviews. Do not use for implementation-only requests, diagnosis without review intent, frontend code, or backend code outside `api/`.frontend-code-reviewlanggeniusUse only when the user explicitly requests a review or audit of frontend code under `web/` or `packages/dify-ui/`. Supports pending-change, file-focused, and pasted-diff reviews. Do not use for implementation-only requests, diagnosis without review intent, or backend-only code.create-fix-prlaunchdarklyInvestigates a root cause and files a minimal fix PR for a reported bug or observability finding.python-code-qualitylaurigatesPython code quality with ruff and ty. Use when the user mentions ruff, ty, linting, formatting, type checking, or Python code style.layer-qualitylayeraiUse when judging Layer output before it ships: scoring generated files against a workspace's output scoring rules, reading back verdicts on a file, reviewing a batch against the brief, or choosing which candidate to deliver. Also when a studio has automated quality standards, or a set must be checked for consistency before handoff. Keywords: quality gate, scoring, review, batch, verdict, approve, QA, consistency check.diagnose-fix-looplegendappIterative diagnose-and-fix workflow that repeatedly uses the diagnose skill to find a proven problem, plan the smallest credible improvement, implement it, re-diagnose, and continue until no useful fix remains or user intervention is required. Requires the diagnose skill; selected installs must also install diagnose. Use when asked to keep debugging, fix and verify, iterate until satisfied, improve after diagnosis, or run a diagnosis/fix/verification loop.simplifylegendappKeep code, tests, documentation, configuration, and other changes as tight, clear, performant, and minimal as possible without weakening behavior. Use during implementation to prevent unnecessary complexity, after behavior is proven to consolidate working changes, before handoff for a full branch audit, and when asked to simplify, tighten, clean up, reduce verbosity, remove complexity, or minimize existing work.static-analysisleokemp223当需要对嵌入式 C/C++ 代码运行 cppcheck、clang-tidy 或 GCC analyzer 静态分析，或进行 MISRA-C 合规检查时使用。hatelilmgeniusAttack a plan, design, or argument like you want it to fail before you commit real effort — return the single load-bearing objection and the cheapest experiment that would prove it matters, not a checklist. User-invoked on purpose: a hate-it reflex always in the agent's reach would bias it toward demolition. Weighs many failure axes but owns the synthesis to one root.prismlilmgeniusSplit one artifact — a claim, plan, or file — across 2 to 5 independent lenses, one per genuinely distinct failure mode (correctness, security, readability, cost, adversarial-user), and return their convergence: where they agree, where they disagree, and the single next question that resolves the disagreement. Use when one reviewer isn't enough because the failure modes are heterogeneous, or a claim looks strong to its author and needs cross-lens pressure before it ships.re0-mergelilmgeniusReview and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the author.re0-worklilmgeniusRestart a project or artifact from v0 while preserving only proven lessons, contracts, gates, vocabulary, real-surface tests, and negative corpus. Use when the foundation is wrong, accumulated code is misleading progress, or a new pass should learn from the old one without inheriting its accidental architecture.showerlilmgeniusCold-read the artifact you're focused on from a fresh, zero-context sub-session to confirm it stands on its own — a shower-thought reset for accumulated session bias. Use when a long session has worn away your fresh eyes and you can no longer tell whether the artifact in focus is clear to someone with no prior context; before a handoff, publish, or merge; or when you want a clean-room comprehension smoke test. Spawns a separate context-free reviewer; it diagnoses, it does not fix.code-reviewllama-farmComprehensive code review for diffs. Analyzes changed code for security vulnerabilities, anti-patterns, and quality issues. Auto-detects domain (frontend/backend) from file paths.lsp-code-analysislsp-clientSemantic code analysis via LSP. Navigate code (definitions, references, implementations), search symbols, preview refactorings, and get file outlines. Use for exploring unfamiliar codebases or performing safe refactoring.cmux-architecturemanaflow-aicmux package architecture, refactor layering, dependency inversion, file organization, DocC documentation, package design discipline, testability, and Swift 6 concurrency rules. Use before adding or meaningfully rewriting Swift files, Swift packages, coordinators, services, repositories, or public package APIs.cmux-shared-behaviormanaflow-aiShared behavior and mutation-path rules for cmux. Use when a behavior is exposed through multiple entrypoints such as keyboard shortcuts, command palette, context menu, CLI, settings, debug menu, optimistic UI, or tests that previously missed a bug.enterprise-architecture-patternsmanutejComplete guide for enterprise architecture patterns including domain-driven design, event sourcing, CQRS, saga patterns, API gateway, service mesh, and scalabilityapi-designmargeloDesign and review predictable public APIs for TypeScript, JavaScript, React, and React Native libraries. Use when shaping exported functions, classes, hooks, options objects, event and listener APIs, error behavior, naming, cross-platform abstractions, or JS-only packages. Pair with build-nitro-modules when the library is backed by Nitro.matlab-performance-optimizermatlabOptimize MATLAB code for better performance through vectorization, memory management, and profiling. Use when user requests optimization, mentions slow code, performance issues, speed improvements, or asks to make code faster or more efficient.shadcn-component-reviewmattbxReview custom components and layouts against shadcn design patterns, visual style conventions (Vega, Nova, Maia, Lyra, Mira), composition rules, design token usage, and Radix/Base UI composition patterns. Use PROACTIVELY after writing or modifying any custom UI component, page layout, or variant of a shadcn component. Use when the user says "review this component", "check my spacing", "does this follow shadcn patterns", "audit this layout", "is this shadcn-idiomatic", or shares a component for fmagento-code-reviewermaxnormReviews Magento 2 code for quality, security, performance, and compliance with PSR-12 and Magento coding standards. Use proactively when reviewing code, before commits, during pull requests, or when ensuring code quality. Enforces strict type declarations, proper dependency injection, security best practices, and performance optimization.linting-neostandard-eslint9mcollinaConfigures ESLint v9 flat config and neostandard for JavaScript and TypeScript projects, including migrating from legacy `.eslintrc*` files or the `standard` package. Use when you need to set up or fix linting with `eslint.config.js` or `eslint.config.mjs`, troubleshoot lint errors, configure neostandard rules, migrate from `.eslintrc` to flat config, or integrate linting into CI pipelines and pre-commit hooks.audit-reference-originalitymengtoAudit a website or digital experience against its supplied source references for originality and plagiarism risk. Use when Codex must compare current or historical site output with reference pages, capture packs, screenshots, copy, brands, numbers, images, assets, videos, layouts, motion, or code; raise evidence-backed red flags; distinguish common visual grammar from distinctive copying; and propose concrete fixes without making unsupported legal claims.audit-verify-explain-grade-5mengtoAudit work, verify claims with concrete evidence, and explain the result in simple grade-5 language. Use when the user asks to review, audit, check, verify, explain a change, explain a fix, summarize test results, validate whether something works, or translate technical findings into plain language for non-technical readers.metabase-semantic-checkermetabaseRuns the Metabase semantic checker against a tree of Representation Format YAML files to verify that all references resolve — cross-entity references (collection_id, dashboard_id, parent_id, parameter source cards, snippet references, transform tags, etc.) and references to columns inside MBQL and native queries. Slow (≥1 min per run). Only use when the user explicitly asks to verify entity references or column references in MBQL/SQL queries; in most cases this runs as a CI step, not locally. Reblast-radiusmichael-denyerFind what a change could break somewhere else before it ships, beyond the diff, and prove the one fact it's safe because of by running real code instead of writing it up. Use for 'blast radius of X', 'what could this break', reviewing a small diff you don't trust, or a brief that asserts something about existing code ('make X public', 'X already handles Y') before you design against that assertion.deslopmichael-denyerRemove AI-generated code slop and clean up code stylehowmichael-denyerUse for \"how does X work\", code walkthroughs before changing something, and placement / ownership / layering questions (\"where should this live\", \"which package owns this\", \"is this the right layer\"). Explains subsystem architecture, runtime flow, onboarding mental models. Use why for motivation.code-qualitymiles990Clean code principles, SOLID, and code review practices