Code review

Skill helderberto/agent-skills/skills/code-review

My personal SDLC toolbelt for AI coding agents — PRD to ship.

Install

npx -y skills add helderberto/agent-skills --skill 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

12 stars12 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

Review a GitHub Pull Request for bugs, security, performance, and code quality. Use when user asks to review a PR or wants pull request feedback. Don't use for reviewing local uncommitted changes, creating new PRs, or merging branches.

SKILL.md

2.7 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Review Pull Request

Mode: $ARGUMENTS

If mode is one of the following, adjust the review:

BUGS: Focus only on logical or other bugs
SECURITY: Focus only on security issues
PERFORMANCE: Focus only on performance issues

Workflow

Analyze the diff and pre-loaded PR context
Read changed files to understand full context
Review based on mode (or all categories if no mode set)
Provide structured feedback

Review criteria

Apply all axes (or narrow to the mode above):

Correctness: Logic bugs, off-by-ones, race conditions, unhandled states, missing error paths
Readability: Functions <50 lines, nesting <3 levels, no dead code/unused imports
Security: No exposed secrets, no any, no unvalidated external data
Immutability: No push/pop/splice/direct mutation
Patterns: Consistent with codebase conventions, no reinvented wheels
Performance: Unnecessary re-renders, O(n²) where O(n) works, missing memoization
Code smells: Duplicated code, parameters >3 without options object, magic numbers

Output format

Group by severity:

Critical - must fix before merge (bugs, security vulnerabilities)
Suggestions - improvements worth considering
Positives - good patterns to call out

Use file:line references for all findings. Include suggested fix for each critical issue.

Rules

Review ALL changed files, not just the latest commit
Be specific, skip nitpicks

Common Rationalizations

Excuse	Rebuttal
"Too small to review"	Small changes cause big bugs — review everything
"It's just a refactor"	Refactors break behavior silently — verify contracts preserved
"Tests pass so it's fine"	Tests don't catch readability, security, or design issues
"I'll clean it up later"	Later never comes — fix now or it ships as-is

Verification

Every changed file reviewed (not just the diff summary)
No critical issue left without a suggested fix
Security concerns flagged with specific fix
Feedback grouped by severity, not file order

Error Handling

If gh pr view fails → run gh auth status to verify authentication; ask user for PR number if not on a PR branch
If a changed file is deleted in the PR → skip reading it; note it was removed
If diff is too large → prioritize changed files with highest risk (auth, payments, data mutation)