Rr

Safe Codex CLI setup installer with skills, AGENTS.md, profiles, and MCP defaults

Install

npx -y skills add dgk-dev/dgk-gpt --skill rr

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

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

코드 리뷰. 작업 후 변경사항을 Z.AI 모델로 검토하고, Codex가 결과를 다시 검증해 유효한 이슈만 정리한다. /rr 또는 'GLM 리뷰' 요청 시 사용.

SKILL.md

2.6 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

/rr

Use glm-review as a second reviewer for the current change set, then validate the reported issues against the actual code before you trust or repeat them.

Default Flow

Determine the exact change scope first.

If the user points to a commit, prefer commit mode.
If the user says staged, use staged mode.
If the user says pr, use PR mode.
If the workspace has mixed unrelated changes, build a focused diff file for only the intended files.

Run a quick connectivity check only when the environment looks suspect:

glm-review --health

Run the review with the narrowest correct input:

glm-review
glm-review --mode staged
glm-review --mode pr
glm-review --mode commit --ref <COMMIT_HASH>
glm-review --diff-file /tmp/glm-review-diff.patch

Treat the output as a candidate issue list, not ground truth.
Re-open the referenced code and verify each claim.
Report only valid issues, ordered by severity.
If fixing issues is in scope, fix them and rerun the closest relevant verification.

Choosing Review Input

Prefer the most specific path that isolates the current task:

committed single change:

glm-review --mode commit --ref <COMMIT_HASH>

committed subset of files:

glm-review --mode commit --ref <COMMIT_HASH> --files src/a.ts src/b.ts

custom focused diff for multi-session or mixed worktrees:

GIT_ROOT=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)
cd "$GIT_ROOT" && git diff HEAD -- <file1> <file2> ... > /tmp/glm-review-diff.patch
glm-review --diff-file /tmp/glm-review-diff.patch

If the diff is empty, stop and say there is nothing to review.

Validation Rules

Do not parrot glm-review output without checking the code.
Drop false positives explicitly instead of forwarding them.
Distinguish between confirmed bugs, arguable style comments, and already-fixed issues.
If the review claims a regression, inspect the relevant file and the actual diff before accepting it.

Error Handling

Common fixes:

command not found: glm-review Install it with npm install -g glm-review
ZAI_API_KEY not set Export ZAI_API_KEY in the shell or your normal secret-loading path before rerunning
401 or auth failure Re-run glm-review --health after refreshing credentials

Finish

Return:

review scope used
confirmed findings only
what was rejected as false positive, if anything material
what verification ran after fixes, if any