Code review assistant
Skill AsiaOstrich/universal-dev-skills/skills/code-review-assistant
⚠️ ARCHIVED: Merged into universal-dev-standards v3.0.0. See https://github.com/AsiaOstrich/universal-dev-standards
npx -y skills add AsiaOstrich/universal-dev-skills --skill code-review-assistantAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- no licenseNo license file was found in the repository. Code published without one is not open source by default, so using it at work is a question for whoever answers licensing questions where you are.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Systematic code review checklist and pre-commit quality gates for PRs. Use when: reviewing pull requests, checking code quality, before committing code. Keywords: review, PR, pull request, checklist, quality, commit, 審查, 檢查, 簽入.
SKILL.md
3.4 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Code Review Assistant
This skill provides systematic checklists for code review and pre-commit verification.
Quick Reference
Comment Prefixes
| Prefix | Meaning | Action Required |
|---|---|---|
| ❗ BLOCKING | Must fix before merge | 🔴 Required |
| ⚠️ IMPORTANT | Should fix, but not blocking | 🟡 Recommended |
| 💡 SUGGESTION | Nice-to-have improvement | 🟢 Optional |
| ❓ QUESTION | Need clarification | 🔵 Discuss |
| 📝 NOTE | Informational, no action | ⚪ Informational |
Review Checklist Categories
- Functionality - Does it work?
- Design - Right architecture?
- Quality - Clean code?
- Readability - Easy to understand?
- Tests - Adequate coverage?
- Security - No vulnerabilities?
- Performance - Efficient?
- Errors - Properly handled?
- Docs - Updated?
- Dependencies - Necessary?
Pre-Commit Checklist
- Build succeeds (zero errors, zero warnings)
- All tests pass
- Code follows project standards
- No security vulnerabilities
- Documentation updated
- Branch synced with target
Detailed Guidelines
For complete standards, see:
Example Review Comments
❗ BLOCKING: Potential SQL injection vulnerability here.
Please use parameterized queries instead of string concatenation.
⚠️ IMPORTANT: This method is doing too much (120 lines).
Consider extracting validation logic to a separate method.
💡 SUGGESTION: Consider using a Map here instead of an array for O(1) lookup.
❓ QUESTION: Why are we using setTimeout here instead of async/await?
📝 NOTE: This is a clever solution! Nice use of reduce here.
Core Principles
- Be Respectful - Review code, not the person
- Be Thorough - Check functionality, not just syntax
- Be Timely - Review within 24 hours
- Be Clear - Explain WHY, not just WHAT
Configuration Detection
This skill supports project-specific configuration.
Detection Order
- Check
CONTRIBUTING.mdfor "Disabled Skills" section- If this skill is listed, it is disabled for this project
- Check
CONTRIBUTING.mdfor "Code Review Language" section - If not found, default to English
First-Time Setup
If no configuration found and context is unclear:
- Ask the user: "This project hasn't configured code review language. Which option would you like? (English / 中文)"
- After user selection, suggest documenting in
CONTRIBUTING.md:
## Code Review Language
This project uses **[chosen option]** for code review comments.
<!-- Options: English | 中文 -->
Configuration Example
In project's CONTRIBUTING.md:
## Code Review Language
This project uses **English** for code review comments.
<!-- Options: English | 中文 -->
### Comment Prefixes
BLOCKING, IMPORTANT, SUGGESTION, QUESTION, NOTE
License: CC BY 4.0 | Source: universal-dev-standards