Code Review
863 skills.
Browse
go-code-reviewcxuu1.5KUse when reviewing Go code or checking code against community style standards. Also use proactively before submitting a Go PR or when reviewing any Go code changes, even if the user doesn't explicitly request a style review. Does not cover language-specific syntax — delegates to specialized skills.code-review-qualityproffesor-for-testing1.5KConduct context-driven code reviews focusing on quality, testability, and maintainability. Use when reviewing code, providing feedback, or establishing review practices.konsistent-configvercel-labs1.5KCreate or modify a konsistent.json configuration file that enforces structural conventions in a TypeScript codebase. Use when the user wants to enforce consistent code structure, validate exports/imports across files, ensure directories contain required files, enforce naming patterns, add/remove/update convention rules, configure case map overrides for acronyms or special casing (kebabToPascalMap, kebabToCamelMap), or troubleshoot why konsistent is reporting violations. Triggers on: "konsistent"code-craftjssblck1.5KApply Jess's engineering conventions to architecture, boundary typing, error handling, and abstraction decisions.diffity-tournilbuild1.5KCreate a guided code tour that walks through the codebase to answer a question or explain a feature. Opens in the browser with step-by-step navigation and highlighted code.cs-refactorcodestable1.5K行为等价的重构、拆分、性能优化。会改变外部可观察行为的诉求走 cs-feat 或 cs-issue。om-verify-in-repoopen-mercato1.5KRead-only triage gate for an autofix chain. Decides whether a tracker issue is a real, still-unfixed defect on the current branch. Stops the chain cleanly with NO_ACTION_NEEDED when the issue is already fixed, already in progress by someone else, already covered by an open PR, or not actually a bug.wcag-accessibility-auditmastepanoski1.5KComprehensive web accessibility audit using WCAG 2.1/2.2 guidelines. Evaluate compliance across 4 POUR principles (Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, Robust) with A, AA, AAA conformance levels.diffity-resolve-treenilbuild1.5KRead open comments from the tree browser and resolve them by making code fixescs-issuecodestable1.5K诊断或修复 bug、报错、性能回退或既有行为异常。不用于新功能（cs-feat）或行为等价重构（cs-refactor）。architecturesickn331.4KArchitectural decision-making framework. Requirements analysis, trade-off evaluation, ADR documentation. Use when making architecture decisions or analyzing system design.code-review-checklistsickn331.4KComprehensive checklist for conducting thorough code reviews covering functionality, security, performance, and maintainabilitysoftware-architecture-designvasilyu19831.4KDesigns runtime and platform architecture inside a chosen solution. Use when deciding modular monolith vs services, consistency, resilience, or estate topology.code-reviewalinaqi1.4KMandatory code reviews via /code-review before commits and deploysom-review-prsopen-mercato1.4KReview all currently unreviewed open pull requests, newest first, using the om-auto-review-pr skill and respecting in-progress claim locks.ai-slop-cleaneryeachan-heo1.4KClean AI-generated code slop with a regression-safe, deletion-first workflow and optional reviewer-only modeskill-reviewerdaymade1.3KReviews and improves Claude Code skills against official best practices. Supports three modes - self-review (validate your own skills), external review (evaluate others' skills), and auto-PR (fork, improve, submit). Use when checking skill quality, reviewing skill repositories, or contributing improvements to open-source skills.adversarial-reviewpoteto1.3KAdversarial code review using cross-model approach. Spawns reviewers on the opposing model (Claude uses Codex, Codex uses Claude) to challenge work from distinct critical lenses. Produces a synthesized verdict with findings and lead judgment. Triggers: "adversarial review".analyzing-release-readinessaws1.3KTrigger a pre-merge release readiness review on a GitHub PR, GitLab MR, or local branch. Use when the user wants to analyze code changes for risk, correctness, and potential rollback issues before merging. Trigger words include release readiness, analyze PR, analyze MR, review PR, risk analysis, pre-merge, safe to ship, ready to merge, ready to commit, any risks, before merging, validate changes, release management.domain-driven-designyonatangross1.3KDDD tactical patterns for complex business modeling including entities, value objects, aggregates, domain services, repositories, specifications, and bounded contexts. Python dataclass implementations with TypeScript alternatives. Use when building rich domain models, enforcing invariants, or separating domain logic from infrastructure.github-code-reviewruvnet1.3KComprehensive GitHub code review with AI-powered swarm coordinationavoid-feature-creepwaynesutton1.3KKeeps a change scoped to what was asked. Flags extra features, refactors, and 'while we are here' edits, and moves them to a suggestions list instead of the diff. Use when a request is small and the agent is about to expand it, when a PRD grows beyond its problem statement, or when the user says 'just do what I asked'.architect-reviewsickn331.3KMaster software architect specializing in modern architectureproduction-code-auditsickn331.3KAutonomously deep-scan entire codebase line-by-line, understand architecture and patterns, then systematically transform it to production-grade, corporate-level professional quality with optimizationslint-and-validatesickn331.3KRun configured lint and type checks, distinguish failures from checks that did not run, and report concrete validation results.code-refactoring-refactor-cleansickn331.3KYou are a code refactoring expert specializing in clean code principles, SOLID design patterns, and modern software engineering best practices. Analyze and refactor the provided code to improve its quality, maintainability, and performance.agent-analyze-code-qualityruvnet1.3KAgent skill for analyze-code-quality - invoke with $agent-analyze-code-qualitycritiqueneolabhq1.2KComprehensive multi-perspective review using specialized judges with debate and consensus buildingmantis-researchergoogle1.2KAudits 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.build-graphtirth82051.2KBuild or update the code review knowledge graph. Run this first to initialize, or let hooks keep it updated automatically.production-gradea-tokyoPrinciple-engineering posture for production-grade code: reads the repo first, plans before code, matches conventions, pulls latest docs over training recall, and ships the simplest correct change that holds the bar — proper algorithms and data structures, idempotent writes, schema+queries+indexes as one artefact, typed errors, tests in the same diff. Substrate-agnostic; defers to peer skills on their lanes. Use for non-trivial planning, design, implementation, review, or refactoring; RCA and deadvise-project-approachaaravkashyap12Research and advise on the best way to approach a software project, including architecture, tech stack, implementation strategy, pricing/operating-cost tradeoffs, benchmark research, and comparisons with similar real-world projects. Use before building, mid-build, or after completion when the user asks for project strategy, optimal approach, research comparables, similar projects, stack selection, vendor/service choice, repo analysis, architecture critique, implementation feedback, or a prioriticrap-analysisaarononthewebAnalyze code coverage and CRAP (Change Risk Anti-Patterns) scores to identify high-risk code. Use OpenCover format with ReportGenerator for Risk Hotspots showing cyclomatic complexity and untested code paths.dotnet-slopwatchaarononthewebUse Slopwatch to detect LLM reward hacking in .NET code changes. Run after every code modification to catch disabled tests, suppressed warnings, empty catch blocks, and other shortcuts that mask real problems.ilspy-decompileaarononthewebUnderstand implementation details of .NET code by decompiling assemblies. Use when you want to see how a .NET API works internally, inspect NuGet package source, view framework implementation, or understand compiled .NET binaries.type-design-performanceaarononthewebDesign .NET types for performance. Seal classes, use readonly structs, prefer static pure functions, avoid premature enumeration, and choose the right collection types.accessibility-auditaccesslintWhole site or product — a full web accessibility (a11y) audit against WCAG 2.2, following the WCAG-EM methodology. Defines scope, samples representative pages and flows, runs the automated tier (`accessibility-scan`) and the hands-on manual tier (`accessibility-inspect`), and produces one conformance report. Grades each finding by severity and evidence basis, and states per-criterion conformance as pass, fail, or undetermined (needs a human). Use it for 'audit my site for accessibility', 'is thiaccessibility-diffaccesslintRegression check — diff a live page's web accessibility (a11y) violations against a baseline. By default it compares your uncommitted changes (stash-based); pass `--branch [<name>]` to compare against a branch. Reports the new WCAG violations introduced, the ones fixed, and the count of pre-existing ones. Use it for 'did my change break accessibility', 'what a11y issues did this PR add', or as a CI gate. For a full scan of one page use `accessibility-scan`; for a whole site use `accessibility-auaccessibility-fixaccesslintRemediation only — repair web accessibility (a11y) violations against WCAG 2.2 with a baseline, edit, and verify loop. Takes a target (URL, files, directory) or a findings worklist from `accessibility-scan`/`accessibility-inspect`/`accessibility-audit`, applies mechanical fixes as given, leaves TODOs for visual or contextual judgment, and verifies by re-running the baseline check. It only fixes. To find issues use `accessibility-scan` (one page, automated), `accessibility-inspect` (one page, manaccessibility-inspectaccesslintOne page, hands-on manual tier — drive a live page through the web accessibility (a11y) checks a rule engine can't decide: keyboard operation and focus order, screen-reader names, roles and states from the accessibility tree, reflow and zoom, reduced motion, form errors, and target size. Grades each finding by evidence basis (verified / confirm-with-a-human / human-required) and severity, and closes every criterion in a ledger: verified, flagged, not exercised, or N/A. Locates and assesses; doesaccessibility-scanaccesslintOne page, automated tier — run the web accessibility (a11y) rule engine against a live page and locate every violation it can detect mechanically. Pass a URL, a config target name (e.g. `accesslint:accessibility-scan dev`), or nothing to use the default target from `accesslint.config.json`. Ensures a debuggable Chrome, runs the @accesslint/core engine over CDP, and returns a worklist of live-DOM WCAG 2.2 violations, each grounded to its DOM selector and source `file:line`. Locates; doesn't edit.code-assessmentadobeDetect, review, and fix code-quality and correctness issues in an AEM as a Cloud Service project — locally, with no external services or network calls. Use whenever a user wants to check, review, assess, audit, scan, modernize, upgrade, or fix AEM Java, Sling Models, OSGi, or Maven code — for example: "check my Sling Models are implemented correctly", "review my @Inject usage", "are my Maven dependencies up to date", "scan this AEM project for issues", "modernize my Sling Models", or "fix code-qaccessibilityaffaan-mWCAG 2.2 レベル AA 標準を用いてインクルーシブなデジタルプロダクトを設計・実装・監査します。Web 用のセマンティック ARIA および Web・ネイティブプラットフォーム（iOS/Android）のアクセシビリティトレイトを生成するために使用します。automation-audit-opsaffaan-mECC用の証拠ベースの自動化インベントリとオーバーラップ監査ワークフロー。ユーザーがどのジョブ、フック、コネクタ、MCPサーバー、またはラッパーがライブか、壊れているか、冗長であるか、修正前に不足しているかを知りたい場合に使用します。cisco-ios-patternsaffaan-mshowコマンド、コンフィグ階層、ワイルドカードマスク、ACL配置、インターフェースハイジーン、安全な変更ウィンドウ検証のためのCisco IOSおよびIOS-XEレビューパターン。click-path-auditaffaan-mユーザー向けボタン/タッチポイントを完全な状態変更シーケンスを通して追跡し、機能が個別に機能するが互いにキャンセルされたり、間違った最終状態を生成したり、UIを矛盾した状態にしたままにするバグを見つけます。次の場合に使用します：体系的なデバッグがバグを見つけたが、ユーザーは壊れたボタンを報告する場合、または共有状態ストアに触れる主要なリファクター後。codehealth-mcpaffaan-mReal-time structural Code Health via CodeScene MCP — review before edits, verify score deltas after changes, gate commits and PRs. Use when reviewing code quality, refactoring, checking if AI changes degraded a file, or before commit/PR.coding-standardsaffaan-mBaseline cross-project coding conventions for naming, readability, immutability, and code-quality review. Use detailed frontend or backend skills for framework-specific patterns. Use when reviewing code quality or naming with no framework-specific skill that applies.cpp-coding-standardsaffaan-mC++ 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.error-handlingaffaan-mTypeScript、Python、Goにわたる堅牢なエラー処理のパターン。型付きエラー、エラー境界、リトライ、サーキットブレーカー、ユーザー向けエラーメッセージをカバーします。