Local ultra review
Use when the user explicitly asks for a deep local code review, PR review, bug hunt, pre-merge review, or Ultra Review style review with high confidence findings.From its SKILL.md
npx -y skills add cogine-ai/local-ultra-reviewAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
2 things 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.
- 0 stars0 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
11.3 KB, ~2.7k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
Local Ultra Review
Run a local Ultra Review style code review. The goal is to find real bugs introduced or worsened by the target diff, with low false positives.
This skill is read-only. Do not modify product code, commit, push, or apply fixes.
Inputs
Invocation examples:
/local-ultra-review/local-ultra-review origin/main/local-ultra-review HEAD~3..HEAD/local-ultra-review pr 123/local-ultra-review https://github.com/org/repo/pull/123/local-ultra-review --base origin/main --mode deep/local-ultra-review pr 123 --post summary/local-ultra-review pr 123 --post review/local-ultra-review pr 123 --keep-worktree
If no target is provided, review the current branch against the default base branch and include staged and unstaged tracked changes.
If the target is a GitHub PR, default to deep mode, collect PR metadata, review the PR head in an isolated worktree, and render a GitHub-ready summary comment. If the user provides a full GitHub PR URL for the current checkout's origin repository, post mode defaults to review; otherwise do not post unless the user passes --post summary or --post review. --post none always disables posting.
Modes:
light: correctness, security/integration, and tests/verificationdeep: default, five reviewer lenses plus verificationmax: broader review for large or high-risk changes
GitHub output:
--post none: default for local branches, ranges, PR numbers, and non-current-repo PR URLs; write local artifacts only--post summary: post one top-level PR summary comment after verification and report rendering--post review: create one GitHub PR review event with CodeRabbit-style inline comments for verified findings that map to diff-commentable right-side lines; list verified findings that cannot be placed inline in the review body
Worktree lifecycle:
- Default: keep review artifacts in
.local-ultra-review/<session-id>/, then remove the temporary worktree after report generation and any selected GitHub posting succeeds. --keep-worktree: preserve the temporary worktree for debugging.- On failed or interrupted review runs, preserve the worktree and state the path.
Hard Rules
- Review only. Do not edit business code.
- Use an isolated worktree when possible.
- Prefer
.local-ultra-review/worktrees/<session-id>/for review workspaces. - Add
.local-ultra-review/to the repository-local git exclude (.git/info/exclude), not to the tracked project.gitignore, unless the user explicitly asks for a repository file change. - Do not copy
.env, credentials, private keys, tokens, gitignored secrets, or local database config unless the user explicitly allows it. - Do not use network access unless the user explicitly allows it, approved project checks require it, or the target is a GitHub PR that requires
ghfor metadata, checkout, or the selected post mode. - Do not report style, formatting, naming preference, or generic maintainability advice as findings.
- A finding must cite exact
file:line. - A finding must include a concrete failure scenario.
- A finding must be checked by a separate verifier pass before it appears as Important or Nit.
- A confirmed finding must include provenance, best fix, refactor judgment, proof, and residual risk; use
N/Aorunknownonly with a reason. - If a candidate cannot be verified, put it under
Needs manual reviewor omit it.
Supporting Files
config/default.yaml: default review behavior and safety settings.config/severity.yaml: local severity definitions.config/ignore.yaml: default low-value path and rule exclusions.prompts/00-review-contract.md: shared finding bar for all reviewers.prompts/01-impact-mapper.md: impact map prompt; does not produce findings.prompts/02-*.mdthrough06-*.md: reviewer lens prompts.prompts/07-verifier.md: required verification pass.prompts/08-dedupe-ranker.md: dedupe and severity ranking rules.prompts/09-final-report.md: final report instructions.schemas/*.schema.json: review bundle and finding schemas.scripts/*.shandscripts/*.py: optional local automation.templates/*.j2: report and comment templates.
Load only the supporting files needed for the current phase.
Pipeline
Phase 0: Preflight
Run:
bash ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/preflight.sh "$ARGUMENTS"
If the script is unavailable, manually inspect:
- git repo root and current branch
- default base branch
- staged, unstaged, and untracked status
- changed files
- package and test commands
REVIEW.md,AGENTS.md,CLAUDE.md,README.md, or equivalent instructions
Stop only if the target cannot be determined or the directory is not a git repository.
Phase 1: Detect Target
Run:
bash ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/detect-target.sh "$ARGUMENTS"
If no argument is provided, use current branch versus the detected default base and include staged and unstaged tracked changes.
Phase 2: Prepare Isolated Workspace
For branch or working-tree targets, run:
bash ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/prepare-worktree.sh --base <base-ref>
For GitHub PR targets, first collect PR metadata and then prepare the PR worktree:
python3 ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/collect-pr-context.py \
--pr <pr-number-or-url> \
--repo <owner/repo-if-known> \
--out .local-ultra-review/<session-id>/pr-context.json
bash ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/prepare-pr-worktree.sh \
--pr <pr-number-or-url> \
--repo <owner/repo-if-known> \
--base <pr-base-ref-name> \
--session-id <session-id>
Expected behavior:
- Create
.local-ultra-review/<session-id>/. - Create a detached worktree under
.local-ultra-review/worktrees/<session-id>/. - Apply staged and unstaged tracked changes when reviewing local working tree changes.
- Do not copy secrets by default.
- Add the output directory to
.git/info/excludewhen it is inside the repository. - Record base, head, session id, worktree path, and patch paths.
If worktree creation fails, continue read-only from the current working tree and state that isolation was not available.
Phase 3: Collect Context
Run in the review workspace if one exists:
python3 ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/collect-context.py \
--base <base-ref> \
--out .local-ultra-review/<session-id>/review-bundle.json
The bundle should include diff patches, changed files, relevant test files, package scripts, project instructions, ignore rules, and detected languages/frameworks. Do not load the whole repository blindly.
Phase 4: Impact Map
Read prompts/01-impact-mapper.md and produce an impact map before looking for bugs. The impact map should identify changed modules, public interfaces, consumers, data models, auth/tenant/privacy boundaries, tests, and high-risk reviewer focus areas. It must not produce final findings.
Phase 5: Reviewer Passes
Run independent reviewer passes using the shared contract in prompts/00-review-contract.md and these lenses:
- Correctness and regression
- Security and privacy
- Integration and API contract
- State, concurrency, migration, and rollback
- Tests and verification
Each reviewer must output candidate findings matching schemas/candidate-finding.schema.json. Prefer fewer high-confidence findings.
Phase 6: Verification
Read prompts/07-verifier.md and verify every candidate. Classify each as:
confirmedfalse_positivepre_existingneeds_manual_review
Only confirmed findings may appear in the main Important or Nit sections.
Phase 7: Dedupe and Rank
Read prompts/08-dedupe-ranker.md. Deduplicate confirmed findings by root cause and rank by severity:
- Security, privacy, permission, data loss
- Production behavior regression
- Migration, rollback, data compatibility
- Integration contract break
- Concurrency, retry, idempotency
- Test blind spot tied to a concrete behavior risk
- Nit
Do not pad the report. If no confirmed findings exist, say so.
Phase 8: Report
Write:
.local-ultra-review/<session-id>/report.md.local-ultra-review/<session-id>/findings.json.local-ultra-review/<session-id>/candidates.jsonl.local-ultra-review/<session-id>/verification.jsonl.local-ultra-review/<session-id>/review-bundle.json.local-ultra-review/<session-id>/logs/
For GitHub PR targets, also write:
.local-ultra-review/<session-id>/pr-context.json.local-ultra-review/<session-id>/github-pr-comment.md.local-ultra-review/<session-id>/github-pr-review-payload.jsonwhenpost_modeisreview
Each confirmed Important or Nit finding in the report and GitHub output must include:
- provenance: introduced by, made visible by, carried forward by, or
N/A/unknownwith reason - best fix: the ownership-boundary fix after reading adjacent code
- refactor: whether a larger refactor improves the bug class or widens risk
- proof: tests, live repro, CI, source, dependency docs, or static/base-vs-head proof
- risk: remaining uncertainty, rollout concern, compatibility issue, or test gap
Render the GitHub summary with:
python3 ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/render-github-summary.py \
--pr-context .local-ultra-review/<session-id>/pr-context.json \
--findings .local-ultra-review/<session-id>/findings.json \
--report .local-ultra-review/<session-id>/report.md \
--out .local-ultra-review/<session-id>/github-pr-comment.md \
--mode <mode> \
--session-id <session-id>
If and only if the user passed --post summary, post exactly one top-level PR comment:
python3 ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/post-github-summary.py \
--pr-context .local-ultra-review/<session-id>/pr-context.json \
--body-file .local-ultra-review/<session-id>/github-pr-comment.md
If post_mode is review, or detect-target.sh set post_mode to review because the user provided a current-repo PR URL, create exactly one GitHub PR review event:
python3 ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/post-github-review.py \
--pr-context .local-ultra-review/<session-id>/pr-context.json \
--findings .local-ultra-review/<session-id>/findings.json \
--mode <mode> \
--session-id <session-id> \
--out .local-ultra-review/<session-id>/github-pr-review-payload.json
The review event should use inline comments only for verified Important/Nit findings on GitHub diff-commentable right-side lines. Do not force inline comments onto unmappable lines; include those findings in the review body instead.
After report rendering and any selected GitHub posting succeeds, remove the temporary worktree while keeping the session artifacts:
bash ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/finalize-session.sh \
--session-dir .local-ultra-review/<session-id> \
--status success
If the run failed, was interrupted, or the user passed --keep-worktree, preserve the worktree:
bash ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/finalize-session.sh \
--session-dir .local-ultra-review/<session-id> \
--status failure \
--keep-worktree
The final response to the user should include only:
- Important count
- Nit count
- Pre-existing count
- Report path
- Top 3 findings, if any
Do not paste large logs into chat.
What ships with it: 74 files
917.7 KB alongside SKILL.md, 37 of them executable
agents/
- openai.yaml387 B
config/
- default.yaml378 B
- ignore.yaml377 B
- severity.yaml770 B
examples/
output/
- .gitkeep1 B
prompts/
schemas/
scripts/
- cleanup.shruns931 B
- collect-context.pyruns13.6 KB
- collect-diff.shruns1.5 KB
- collect-pr-context.pyruns5.8 KB
- collect-tests.pyruns2.8 KB
- dedupe-rank.pyruns4.0 KB
- detect-target.shruns7.1 KB
- ensure-local-ignore.shruns949 B
- finalize-session.shruns1.3 KB
- post-github-review.pyruns10.2 KB
- post-github-summary.pyruns2.2 KB
- preflight.shruns4.6 KB
- prepare-pr-worktree.shruns3.1 KB
- .gitignore77 B
- pyproject.toml519 B
- README.md12.9 KB
34 more files not listed here. See all 74 in the repository.