agentsclimarketplace

Code reviewer

Skill srg-sphynx/MDForge/Sources/MDForge/Resources/SkillLibrary/Development/code-reviewer

Native macOS skill-catalog studio for Claude Code — browse 1,492 Markdown skills, customize with variables or AI (hosted or local), export to .claude/skills. SwiftUI + Liquid Glass.

Install
npx -y skills add srg-sphynx/MDForge --skill code-reviewer

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.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Code review automation for TypeScript, JavaScript, Python, Go, Swift, Kotlin, C#, .NET, Java, C, C++, Rust, Ruby, PHP, and Dart/Flutter. Analyzes PRs for complexity and risk, checks code quality for SOLID violations and code smells, generates review reports. Use when reviewing pull requests, analyzing code quality, identifying issues, generating review checklists.

SKILL.md

6.4 KB, ~1.4k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it

Code Reviewer

Automated code review tools for analyzing pull requests, detecting code quality issues, and generating review reports.


How This Skill Is Organized

code-reviewer/
  SKILL.md                        ← you are here (tools + dispatch table)
  rules/
    universal.md                  ← security, async, resources, exceptions, performance — all languages
  languages/
    python.md                     ← Python-specific rules + idioms
    typescript.md                 ← TypeScript / JavaScript-specific rules + idioms
    go.md                         ← Go-specific rules + idioms
    swift.md                      ← Swift-specific rules + idioms
    kotlin.md                     ← Kotlin-specific rules + idioms
    csharp.md                     ← C# / .NET-specific rules + idioms
    java.md                       ← Java-specific rules + idioms
    c.md                          ← C -specific rules + idioms
    cpp.md                        ← C++ -specific rules + idioms
    rust.md                       ← Rust -specific rules + idioms
    ruby.md                       ← Ruby -specific rules + idioms
    php.md                        ← PHP-specific rules + idioms
    dart.md                       ← Dart / Flutter-specific rules + idioms

Loading order for every review

  1. This file (SKILL.md) — tools and thresholds
  2. rules/universal.md — always, for every language
  3. The matching languages/*.md — one file based on the extension table below

That is always exactly 2 additional files, regardless of scope.

Extension(s)Load
.pylanguages/python.md
.ts, .tsx, .js, .jsx, .mjslanguages/typescript.md
.golanguages/go.md
.swiftlanguages/swift.md
.kt, .ktslanguages/kotlin.md
.cs, .csx, .razor, .cshtmllanguages/csharp.md
.javalanguages/java.md
.c, .hlanguages/c.md
.cpp, .cc, .cxx, .hpp, .hh, .hxxlanguages/cpp.md
.rslanguages/rust.md
.rb, .rake, .gemspec, .rulanguages/ruby.md
.php, .phtmllanguages/php.md
.dartlanguages/dart.md

Tools

PR Analyzer

Analyzes git diff between branches to assess review complexity and identify risks.

# Analyze current branch against main
python scripts/pr_analyzer.py /path/to/repo

# Compare specific branches
python scripts/pr_analyzer.py . --base main --head feature-branch

# JSON output for integration
python scripts/pr_analyzer.py /path/to/repo --json

What it detects (universal — see also language file for language-specific signals):

  • Hardcoded secrets (passwords, API keys, tokens, connection strings)
  • SQL / query injection patterns
  • Debug statements left in production code
  • Lint / analyzer suppression annotations
  • TODO/FIXME comments

Language-specific detections are defined in each languages/*.md file.

Output includes:

  • Complexity score (1-10)
  • Risk categorization (critical, high, medium, low)
  • File prioritization for review order
  • Commit message validation

Code Quality Checker

Analyzes source code for structural issues, code smells, and SOLID violations.

# Analyze a directory
python scripts/code_quality_checker.py /path/to/code

# Analyze specific language
# Valid values: python, typescript, javascript, go, swift, kotlin, csharp, java, c, cpp, rust, ruby, php, dart
python scripts/code_quality_checker.py . --language java

# JSON output
python scripts/code_quality_checker.py /path/to/code --json

Universal thresholds:

IssueThreshold
Long function>50 lines
Large file>500 lines
God class>20 methods
Too many params>5
Deep nesting>4 levels
High complexity>10 branches

Language-specific checks are defined in each languages/*.md file.


Review Report Generator

Combines PR analysis and code quality findings into structured review reports.

# Generate report for current repo
python scripts/review_report_generator.py /path/to/repo

# Markdown output
python scripts/review_report_generator.py . --format markdown --output review.md

# Use pre-computed analyses
python scripts/review_report_generator.py . \
  --pr-analysis pr_results.json \
  --quality-analysis quality_results.json

Verdicts:

ScoreVerdict
90+ with no high issuesApprove
75+ with ≤2 high issuesApprove with suggestions
50-74Request changes
<50 or critical issuesBlock

Adding a New Language

Reviewer guidance (required):

  1. Create languages/<name>.md using any existing language file as a template — it must have sections: PR Analyzer Signals, Code Quality Checks, Security, Async, Resource Management, Exception Handling, Performance, Idioms.
  2. Add the extension row to the dispatch table above.

That is all the agent-driven review needs.

Deterministic analyzer support (optional, recommended): the bundled scripts only flag a language they explicitly know. To make code_quality_checker.py score the new language:

  1. Add the extensions to LANGUAGE_EXTENSIONS in scripts/code_quality_checker.py (this also adds the --language choice).
  2. Add function / class / method regex entries for the language in the same file; otherwise it falls back to the Python patterns.
  3. Optionally add a check_<name>_specific_smells(...) detector (see the C#, Java, and C ones) and call it from analyze_file.
  4. Add assets/sample_<name>_smells.<ext> + _clean fixtures and commit the expected --json output under expected_outputs/ as a regression guard.

Regression Fixtures

Labelled fixtures live in assets/ with their committed --json output in expected_outputs/ (C#, Java, and C). Drift from the committed JSON signals a behaviour change in the analyzer:

python scripts/code_quality_checker.py assets/sample_java_smells.java --json \
  | diff - expected_outputs/sample_java_smells_quality.json

Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most code review skills give in ~1.4k tokens

Counted across 610 of the 674 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-08-06

  • push back with technical reasoning if wrongin 60 of 610, across 24 files
  • ask for clarification on unclear itemsin 51 of 610, across 16 files
  • fix critical issues immediatelyin 45 of 610, across 29 files
  • implement one item at a timein 45 of 610, across 11 files
  • group findings by severityin 44 of 610, across 43 files
  • verify feedback against the codebasein 42 of 610, across 8 files
  • dispatch a code reviewer subagentin 39 of 610, across 23 files
  • fix important issues before proceedingin 37 of 610, across 22 files
  • test each fix individuallyin 35 of 610, across 7 files
  • reply in github comment threadsin 33 of 610, across 5 files
  • check for security vulnerabilitiesin 31 of 610, across 27 files
  • factualize corrections without over-explainingin 30 of 610, across 2 files

Grouped from the skills themselves: near-identical wordings counted once, and counted by distinct author, so one author publishing three of these counts once. Length counted with cl100k_base; the agent that loads this file may tokenize it differently.

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.