Review network

Skill philpalmieri/engineering-manager-skills/skills/metrics/review-network

Install

npx -y skills add philpalmieri/engineering-manager-skills --skill review-network

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

1 stars1 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

Analyze the team's code review network: who reviews whom, reciprocity ratios, network density, and time-series comparison. Surfaces siloed review patterns and shows improvement toward distributed collaboration. Use when asked about review dynamics, collaboration patterns, or team connectivity.

The file declares its own license as MIT. That is the author’s claim about this one file, and it is not the same thing as the license GitHub reports for the repository, which is listed with the other numbers below.

SKILL.md

4.4 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Review Network Analysis

Analyze the team's review relationships to surface collaboration patterns, detect silos, and track improvement toward distributed code review.

When to Trigger

"review network", "who reviews whom", "collaboration graph"
"review dynamics", "review distribution", "are we siloed?"
As part of a team health report

Data Sources

data/YYYY-MM/{login}-reviews.json — reviews given by each person
data/YYYY-MM/{login}-prs.json — PRs authored (to identify inbound reviews)
team.json — team roster for member list

Process

Step 1: Load review data for the requested period

Parse the date range (default: last quarter). For each team member, load their {login}-reviews.json files for the relevant months. Extract:

Who authored the PR being reviewed
Filter to team-internal reviews only (both author and reviewer are in team.json members)

Step 2: Build the review matrix

Construct an N×N matrix where:

Rows = reviewer
Columns = PR author
Values = review count

| Reviewer | alice | bob | carol | dave | Total Given |
|----------|-------|-----|-------|------|-------------|
| alice    |   ·   |  12 |   8   |   3  |     23      |
| bob      |   5   |  ·  |  15   |   7  |     27      |
| carol    |   9   |  18 |   ·   |  11  |     38      |
| dave     |   2   |   4 |   6   |   ·  |     12      |

Step 3: Calculate network metrics

Network density (0-1 scale):

Count of non-zero cells / total possible cells (N×(N-1))
1.0 = everyone reviews everyone; low values = siloed

Collaboration score (0-1 scale):

Based on how evenly distributed reviews are across the matrix
Uses normalized entropy: H / H_max where H = Shannon entropy of the flattened matrix
1.0 = perfectly uniform; 0.0 = all reviews flow through one person

Gini coefficient (0-1 scale):

Inequality of review distribution
0.0 = perfectly equal; 1.0 = one person does all reviews
Track this over time; decreasing Gini = healthier team

Bottleneck ratio:

Max reviews received by one person / average reviews received
2.0 = someone is a bottleneck

Step 4: Reciprocity analysis

For each pair (A, B), calculate:

A→B reviews vs B→A reviews
Ratio (>1 means A reviews B more than reverse)
Flag highly asymmetric pairs (ratio > 3:1)

Step 5: Time-series comparison

Compare current period to previous period(s). Show:

Network density trend (is it improving?)
Gini trend (is distribution getting more equal?)
New review relationships (pairs that didn't exist before)
Disappeared relationships (pairs that stopped reviewing each other)

Step 6: Visualization

Produce an ASCII network diagram showing connection strength:

Review Network (Jan-Mar 2026)
Density: 0.86 | Collab: 0.71 | Gini: 0.32

  alice ═══════ bob        (12/5 reviews, reciprocity 2.4:1)
    │  ╲         │
    │    ╲       │
    8      3    15
    │        ╲   │
    ▼          ╲ ▼
  carol ═══════ dave       (6/11 reviews, reciprocity 1:1.8)

Use line thickness/characters to indicate volume:

═══ heavy (10+ reviews)
─── moderate (5-9)
··· light (1-4)
(blank) no relationship

Output Format

# Review Network: {period}

## Network Health
| Metric | Current | Previous | Trend |
|--------|---------|----------|-------|
| Density | 0.86 | 0.71 | 🟢 +21% |
| Collaboration | 0.71 | 0.52 | 🟢 +37% |
| Gini | 0.32 | 0.49 | 🟢 -35% |
| Bottleneck | 1.4 | 2.3 | 🟢 -39% |

## Review Matrix
[matrix table]

## Reciprocity (flagged pairs)
[asymmetric pairs with ratio > 3:1]

## Network Changes
- New connections: [pairs]
- Strengthened: [pairs with >50% increase]
- Weakened: [pairs with >50% decrease]

## Network Diagram
[ASCII visualization]

Interpretation Guide

Improving network: density increasing, Gini decreasing, fewer bottleneck flags
Siloed team: density < 0.5, Gini > 0.5, one person with bottleneck > 3.0
Healthy team: density > 0.7, Gini < 0.35, all pairs have some bidirectional flow