Code review
Standalone AI skills adapted from BMAD workflows, ready to install with the skills CLI.
npx -y skills add sungkhum/agent-skills-pack --skill 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.
- 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
Adversarial code review that validates implemented work against a story/spec, acceptance criteria, and actual git changes. Use when the user asks to run a code review, review a diff/PR, verify tasks or acceptance criteria are done, or validate story claims versus code.
SKILL.md
2.5 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Code Review
Overview
Perform a rigorous, adversarial review that cross-checks story claims and acceptance criteria against the real code changes. Prioritize concrete, reproducible findings with file and line references. If the code is clean, explicitly say so.
Quick Start
- Determine scope: story file + repository, or a diff/PR.
- Identify repo root (use git) and collect changed files via
git status --porcelain,git diff --name-only, andgit diff --cached --name-only. - Load story/spec inputs if provided; otherwise ask for the story/spec or acceptance criteria.
- Exclude non-application files and folders (
.cursor/,.windsurf/,.claude/, and other tooling/config folders unless explicitly requested).
Workflow
Follow the detailed workflow in references/workflow.md. Use these guardrails when adapting it to a standalone repo:
- If
{project-root}/workflow-config.yamldoes not exist, treat config values as optional and ask the user for missing items that affect output (language, skill level, story path, etc.). - If planning artifacts (architecture/ux/epics) are unavailable, proceed with the story/spec and code changes only; note missing context explicitly.
- If no story file exists, replace “story validation” with “requirements validation” using the user-provided criteria or a PR description.
Review Expectations
- Validate each Acceptance Criterion and each task marked complete. Missing ACs are HIGH severity; tasks marked complete but not implemented are CRITICAL.
- Cross-check story File List against actual git changes; report discrepancies.
- Cover security, performance, error handling, test quality, and maintainability.
- If no issues remain after a second pass, report a clean review.
Output
- Present findings grouped by severity with evidence (
file:line), and a short impact statement. - If asked, fix issues or create action items; otherwise provide a concise remediation list.
- When applicable, update story status and sprint status in accordance with the workflow.
References
references/workflow.mdfor the full standalone code review flow.references/discover-inputs.mdfor input discovery/loading strategy.references/checklist.mdfor the review completion checklist.