Review code
Skill serpro69/claude-toolbox/kodex-plugin/skills/review-code
Minimal by design, explicitly multi-lang, production-ready and battle-tested collection of configs and plugins for your Claude Code agentic development workflows: mcp, configs, skills, agents and more.
npx -y skills add serpro69/claude-toolbox --skill review-codeAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing 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.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Code review of current git changes with an expert senior-engineer lens. Detects SOLID violations, security risks, and proposes actionable improvements. Use when performing code reviews.
SKILL.md
5.2 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
SOLID Code Review
Overview
Perform a structured review of the current git changes with focus on SOLID, architecture, removal candidates, and security risks. Default to review-only output unless the user asks to implement changes.
Conventions
- Read capy knowledge base conventions at shared-capy-knowledge-protocol.md.
- Read profile detection — the set of reference checklists loaded for a given diff — at shared-profile-detection.md. The workflow below invokes it in Step 2 and uses the resulting
(profile, checklist)list to drive Steps 3–4.
Required Outputs
Before declaring the review complete, verify all outputs are delivered:
- Review report presented to user
- P0/P1 systemic findings indexed as
kk:review-findings(skip if no qualifying findings) - Next steps confirmation from user
Indexing is owned by this skill — callers (e.g., $kk:implement) do NOT duplicate it.
Review Modes
Standard Mode ($kk:review-code)
Reviews code in the main conversation context. Fast, single-pass review using the workflow below.
Isolated Mode ($kk:review-code:isolated)
Delegates detection to independent reviewers that did not write the code, then annotates their findings with author context. Two parallel reviewers: a code-reviewer sub-agent and pal codereview (external model in native format). Produces a report organized by agreement level with corroborated findings highlighted.
- Cost: Higher (sub-agent + external model + annotation)
- Isolation: True — reviewers have zero authorship bias or session context
- Degradation: Graceful — if one reviewer fails, proceeds with the other; if both fail, suggests standard mode fallback
- Best for: When extra rigor is worth the cost (pre-merge, high-stakes changes)
See review-isolated.md for the isolated workflow.
Severity Levels
| Level | Name | Description | Action |
|---|---|---|---|
| P0 | Critical | Security vulnerability, data loss risk, correctness bug | Must block merge |
| P1 | High | Logic error, significant SOLID violation, performance regression | Should fix before merge |
| P2 | Medium | Code smell, maintainability concern, minor SOLID violation | Fix in this PR or create follow-up |
| P3 | Low | Style, naming, minor suggestion | Optional improvement |
Workflow
Mandatory ordering — methodology before evidence
The workflow below is strictly sequential. Do not read the diff's contents, re-read changed files, run capy_search, or begin forming findings until you have completed profile detection and loaded every resolved checklist file. Until then, your only contact with the changes is git diff --stat (filenames only) — enough to drive profile detection, but not enough to pattern-match findings.
This ordering is load-bearing, not stylistic. Reviewing from a diff before loading profile checklists is the known failure mode this skill is designed to prevent: the LLM has enough from the diff to produce plausible findings, and optimizes away the methodology if the workflow permits.
Phases (summary — the detailed procedure in review-process.md breaks presentation into three distinct numbered steps: present results, next-steps confirmation, verify outputs):
- Scope —
git diff --statfor filenames only (no content reads) - Detect active profiles — delegate to
shared-profile-detection.md; produce the list of(profile, checklist)records - Load profile review indexes — for each active profile, resolve its
review-code/index.md; collect always-load + filename-evaluable conditionals now; defer content-evaluable conditionals to Step 6 - Read resolved checklists — read every
(profile, checklist)file collected in Step 3 into context - Read the diff and re-read changed files — now, with methodology loaded; also run
capy_searchforkk:review-findingsandkk:lang-idioms - Resolve content-evaluable conditional entries — for each deferred entry from Step 3, evaluate the predicate against the file content read in Step 5; load any newly-matching checklists into context
- Apply checklists — iterate the full resolved list (Steps 3 + 6); emit findings grouped by
(profile, checklist) - Self-check and confidence assessment
- Index findings — capy index systemic P0/P1 patterns as
kk:review-findings - Present results with next steps
See review-process.md for the detailed step-by-step process.
Invocation
Standard mode:
$kk:review-code
Isolated mode with independent sub-agents:
$kk:review-code:isolated