Review

Skill honerlaw/agent-marketplace/plugins/minerva/skills/review

Reviews a changeset against both the minerva spec/knowledge lenses and code quality. With a work unit in context it runs a spec/knowledge audit alongside the code quality review, presenting both result sets before unified triage; if a GitHub PR exists for the branch it delegates code quality to `code-review:code-review`, otherwise it performs a check via a fresh-context subagent in the same finding format. Triage state persists to the scratchpad so re-runs pre-fill prior dispositions. Use when implementation on a work unit has just finished and the diff is unreviewed, when the user asks to review or audit a changeset or to verify shipped code matches what was designed, or when they invoke `minerva:review`.From its SKILL.md

Install

npx -y skills add honerlaw/agent-marketplace --skill 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

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

3.1 KB, 562 tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it

Review the active changeset for both design compliance and code quality. Works against the local diff — no PR required. When a minerva work unit is found, runs a spec/knowledge audit alongside the code quality review and presents both result sets in parallel before triage. When no minerva context exists, runs the code quality review alone.

Usage

minerva:review — audits the work unit inferred from current-session context, or the most-recently-modified if context is ambiguous; falls back to a plain code review if no work unit is found
minerva:review 005-add-payments — audit the named unit explicitly

Protocol

The full step protocols live verbatim in references/protocol.md — read it now, before executing: Target resolution → Worktree entry → Diff resolution → Minerva audit (spec fidelity + knowledge compliance; only when minerva context exists) → Code review invocation (delegates to code-review:code-review when a PR exists, fresh-context subagent check otherwise) → Parallel presentation → Interactive triage (FIX / SUGGEST / IGNORE) → Triage persistence (scratchpad pre-fill for re-runs) → On approval — file writes → Report.

Lifecycle ordering

Canonical order: minerva:work → minerva:review → minerva:promote → minerva:ship. Review runs before promote so review-derived scratchpad notes flow through the promote partition. If review surfaces durable knowledge that promote already ran on, run promote again. The skills are idempotent — cycle as needed.

Idempotency

Review is stateless across runs except for the ## Review triage YYYY-MM-DD blocks it writes to scratchpad for resume. Re-running on the same diff produces the same findings; dispositions are pre-filled from the most recent triage block.

minerva:review  →  fixes applied  →  minerva:promote  →  minerva:review  →  zero findings  →  minerva:ship

Out of scope

Writing to .minerva/knowledge/ directly. All durable knowledge goes through minerva:promote — one writer, one set of conventions.
A review.md log file. FIX outcomes are visible in git; SUGGEST and IGNORE outcomes flow through scratchpad → promote. Triage state lives in scratchpad. A standalone log duplicates what those already capture.
Scoped review (e.g. minerva:review src/api/). Deferred until the no-scope default proves noisy.

What ships with it: 1 file

10.7 KB alongside SKILL.md

references/

protocol.md10.7 KB