agentsclimarketplace

Receiving code review

Skill charlieviettq/awesome-agent-skill/.cursor/skills/core-workflow/receiving-code-review

Curated skill pack for LLM agents in engineer and science workflow (Cursor & Claude ready).

Install
npx -y skills add charlieviettq/awesome-agent-skill --skill receiving-code-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

  • 22 stars22 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.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Receive code review feedback constructively—verify claims, prioritize fixes, push back with evidence when needed. Use when acting on reviewer comments or preparing a second review round. Triggers: "code review", "reviewer said", "address review", "feedback on PR".

SKILL.md

1.8 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Receiving code review

Mindset

  • Reviewers surface risk you may have missed; treat feedback as input, not orders.
  • Verify technical claims before changing code (read code, run tests).

Workflow

  1. Read fully — understand intent, not only the literal suggestion.
  2. Clarify — if feedback is vague, ask one focused question before partial implementation.
  3. Verify — reproduce issue or confirm the concern in code; do not assume the reviewer is correct.
  4. Prioritize — correctness and security before style.
  5. Respond — agree + fix, or disagree with evidence (snippet, test, spec).
  6. Batch related fixes; avoid drive-by changes outside review scope.
  7. Confirm — run verification before marking threads resolved.

When to push back

  • Suggestion breaks API contract without migration plan.
  • Fix is out of PR scope (offer follow-up issue).
  • Reviewer assumption is wrong (show counter-evidence).

When to accept quickly

  • Naming/clarity that matches project conventions.
  • Missing tests for changed behavior.
  • Security or data-handling gaps.

Anti-patterns

  • Defensive replies without technical substance.
  • Blindly applying every suggestion without understanding.
  • Scope creep disguised as "while we're here".
  • Implementing every comment without verifying technical accuracy.

Related

requesting-code-review, github-comment-triage, verify-before-done

Review handling patterns inspired by obra/superpowers (MIT).

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. 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.