Receiving code review
Skill roronoazoroshao369/vibe-coding-os/skills/core/receiving-code-review
Vibe Coding OS — Claude/Codex/Cursor skill framework with 139 skills, 111 commands, 95 templates, 22 tracked sources, 28/28 validation gates PASS. Quality Shield, Engineering Discipline Pack, plugin marketplace.
npx -y skills add roronoazoroshao369/vibe-coding-os --skill receiving-code-reviewAssembled 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
2.1 KB, 399 tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
Skill: Receiving Code Review
Purpose
Turn review feedback into a prioritized response plan, fix real issues, and preserve explicit decisions for deferred items.
When to use
Use when a human or agent reviewer provides comments, blockers, test failures, or merge-readiness feedback.
Inputs
Review comments, current diff, spec/plan, validation output, project constraints, and user priorities.
Optional: use an intelligence map
If the review request asks for an intelligence map, or if the change is complex enough to warrant one, run vibe-review-intelligence or follow skills/core/code-intelligence-review/SKILL.md before analysing feedback. The intelligence map provides a structural baseline — call graph, dependency chains, data flow, and test gaps — that helps you classify feedback by true impact. A blocker that affects a widely-called function is more urgent than one in a leaf module; the map reveals this quickly.
Workflow
- Classify feedback as blocker, correctness issue, maintainability suggestion, question, or optional follow-up.
- Address blockers and correctness issues before style preferences.
- If feedback conflicts with requirements, ask or explain the trade-off before editing.
- Make focused fixes and avoid using review as permission for broad rewrites.
- Re-run relevant checks after changes.
- Respond with what changed, what was verified, and what remains deferred with rationale.
Outputs
A review-response summary, focused follow-up patch, updated validation status, and any deferred items with rationale.
Failure modes
- Treating every suggestion as mandatory scope expansion.
- Dismissing blockers without evidence.
- Fixing review comments but not rerunning relevant checks.
- Leaving deferred decisions undocumented.
Verification checklist
- Feedback is triaged by severity.
- Blockers are resolved or escalated.
- Checks were rerun where relevant.
- Deferred items have rationale and owner/next step.