agentsclimarketplace

Review

Skill akshan-main/review-by-opp/skills/review

Run Codex as an independent reviewer against the current diff or changed files. Parses findings into the ledger. Use after making code changes.From its SKILL.md

Install
npx -y skills add akshan-main/review-by-opp --skill review

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

  • 6 stars6 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

SKILL.md

4.9 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

You are running a Codex review round. Codex is the auditor - it reviews, you do not edit during this step.

What to do

  1. Verify session exists:

    • Read reviews/current.json. If missing, tell user: "No active session. Run /review-by-opp:start first."
  2. Determine review scope:

    • Check reviewScope in config (from reviews/current.json or .review-by-opp.json):
      • "diff" - include the git diff in the audit prompt for context
      • "changed-files" - include full content of changed files
      • "changed-files-plus-tests" - changed files plus related test files
      • "full-repo" - review the entire repository (Codex reads all files via sandbox)
    • For diff, changed-files, and changed-files-plus-tests: check git diff --name-only first. If no changes, tell user: "No changes to review. Make code changes first."
    • For full-repo: skip the diff check - Codex reviews everything
  3. Increment round:

    • Update current_round in the ledger
  4. Write context file for Codex:

    • Write reviews/context.md so Codex has full project context despite being stateless. Include:
      • Project summary: what the project does (read from README or package.json description)
      • Tech stack: languages, frameworks, key dependencies
      • What changed this session: summary of changes made since session started (from git log/diff)
      • Previous findings (if round > 1): list all findings from prior rounds with their current status (open/fixed/etc), so Codex knows what was already flagged and can verify fixes
      • User notes: any message the user passed as arguments — could be concerns, questions, hints, or areas to investigate
    • Keep it concise — this is context, not a full dump. Aim for under 200 lines.
  5. Build the audit prompt:

    • Base prompt: instruct Codex to review the code for bugs, security issues, performance problems, and code quality
    • Always instruct Codex to first read reviews/context.md for project context and previous findings
    • For diff scope: include the git diff output in the prompt
    • For changed-files scope: include the full file contents of changed files
    • For full-repo scope: instruct Codex to read and review all source files in the repository
    • If the user provided arguments, include them verbatim as a user note to Codex. This can be anything — concerns ("I think the auth flow might be wrong"), questions ("is this SQL query safe?"), hints ("check the retry logic in worker.ts"), or general direction. Examples:
      • /review-by-opp:review I think the error handling in api.ts might be wrong
      • /review-by-opp:review check if the rate limiter actually works under concurrency
      • /review-by-opp:review is it ok to use eval here or is there a safer way
    • Always instruct Codex to output findings in the format: FINDING: {"title":"...","severity":"...","category":"...","file":"...","line":...,"description":"...","suggested_fix":"..."}
  6. Run Codex review:

    • Execute Codex in auditor-only mode with a read-only sandbox:
      • Base form: npx @openai/codex exec --sandbox read-only "<audit prompt>"
      • If model override is configured, include --model <model>
      • If reasoning override is configured, include -c model_reasoning_effort=<effort>
    • Keep default behavior inherited when overrides are not configured.
    • Capture the full output
  7. Parse findings:

    • Extract lines starting with FINDING: and parse the JSON
    • For each finding, assign an ID like f-{round}-{short-uuid}
    • Set status to open
    • Deduplicate against existing findings (same file + title + category within 5 lines = duplicate)
  8. Update ledger:

    • Add new findings to reviews/current.json
    • Write round snapshot to reviews/rounds/round-{N}.json
    • Write summary to reviews/summaries/summary-{N}.json
  9. Run verification checks (if configured):

    • If rerunChecks is true in config, run available checks (test, lint, typecheck)
    • Report results
  10. Report results:

  • Show number of new findings, total open, blocking open
  • List each new finding with severity, category, title, file, and line
  • Show the round verdict: needs_fixes, converging, stalled, or clean
  • If blocking findings exist, remind: "You must resolve these before finalizing. Use /review-by-opp:fix."
  1. Check convergence:
  • If no blocking findings remain: "Ready to finalize. Run /review-by-opp:finalize."
  • If max rounds reached: warn the user
  • If stalled (same blocking findings for N rounds): warn the user

CRITICAL: Do NOT edit any files during the review step. You are only gathering and recording Codex's findings.

$ARGUMENTS

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 627,801. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.