Requesting code review
Skill izyanrajwani/agent-skills-library/skills/requesting-code-review
🛠️ Enhance programming workflows with a curated library of agent skills for tasks like code review, debugging, and planning for efficient project execution.
npx -y skills add izyanrajwani/agent-skills-library --skill requesting-code-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.
- 4 stars4 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
Use when you need to request a code review for a PR/MR and want a consistent review brief (context, scope, risk areas, test instructions, acceptance criteria) before merge.
SKILL.md
2.4 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Requesting Code Review
Dispatch code-reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade.
Core principle: Review early, review often.
How to Request
1. Get git SHAs:
# For PR/branch review (recommended):
BASE_SHA=$(git merge-base origin/main HEAD)
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
# For single commit only:
# BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1)
2. Dispatch code-reviewer subagent:
Use Task tool with template at templates/code-reviewer.md
Placeholders:
{WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED}- What you just built{PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS}- What it should do{BASE_SHA}- Starting commit{HEAD_SHA}- Ending commit{DESCRIPTION}- Brief summary
3. Act on feedback:
- Fix Critical issues immediately
- Fix Important issues before proceeding
- Note Minor issues for later
- Push back if reviewer is wrong (with reasoning)
Example
[Just completed Task 2: Add verification function]
BASE_SHA=$(git log --oneline | grep "Task 1" | head -1 | awk '{print $1}')
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
[Dispatch code-reviewer subagent with references/code-reviewer.md]
WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED: Verification and repair functions for conversation index
PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from docs/plans/deployment-plan.md
BASE_SHA: a7981ec
HEAD_SHA: 3df7661
DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types
[Subagent returns]:
Strengths: Clean architecture, real tests
Issues:
Important: Missing progress indicators
Minor: Magic number (100) for reporting interval
Assessment: Ready to proceed
[Fix progress indicators, continue to Task 3]
Integration with Workflows
Subagent-Driven Development:
- Review after EACH task
- Catch issues before they compound
- Fix before moving to next task
Executing Plans:
- Review after each batch (3 tasks)
- Get feedback, apply, continue
Ad-Hoc Development:
- Review before merge
- Review when stuck
Red Flags
Never:
- Skip review because "it's simple"
- Ignore Critical issues
- Proceed with unfixed Important issues
- Argue with valid technical feedback
If reviewer wrong:
- Push back with technical reasoning
- Show code/tests that prove it works
- Request clarification