Code review checklist
Skill tranhieutt/software_development_department/.claude/skills/code-review-checklist
Software Development Department
npx -y skills add tranhieutt/software_development_department --skill code-review-checklistAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Provides a comprehensive code review checklist for pull requests covering security, performance, maintainability, and testing. Use as a reference during code reviews or when the user asks for a review checklist.
SKILL.md
3.1 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Code Review Checklist
Pre-review (always start here)
- Read PR description and linked issue — understand the why
- Check CI passes before spending time on review
- Pull branch locally if logic is complex
Functionality
- Solves stated problem and meets acceptance criteria
- Edge cases: null/empty inputs, concurrent calls, network failure
- Error handling: errors caught, message doesn't expose internals
- No off-by-one, loop termination, or race conditions
Security (block if any fail)
- No SQL injection — use parameterized queries, not string concat
- No XSS — escape all user-controlled output in DOM
- No hardcoded secrets — use environment variables
- Authentication required on all protected routes
- Authorization checks presence AND ownership (not just auth)
- File uploads validated: type, size, content
// ❌ SQL injection
const q = `SELECT * FROM users WHERE email = '${email}'`;
// ✅ Parameterized
db.query("SELECT * FROM users WHERE email = $1", [email]);
// ❌ Hardcoded secret
const KEY = "sk_live_abc123";
// ✅ Env variable
const KEY = process.env.API_KEY;
if (!KEY) throw new Error("API_KEY is required");
Performance
- No N+1 queries — check ORM calls inside loops
- Database queries use indexes for filter/sort columns
- No unbounded queries — always paginate or limit
- No blocking main thread with sync I/O (Node.js)
- Caching used for repeated expensive operations
Code quality
- Names describe intent (
calculateTotalPricenotcalc) - Functions have single responsibility (< ~30 lines is a signal)
- No dead code or commented-out blocks
- DRY — no copy-paste of more than 3 lines
- Follows existing project conventions and patterns
- Abstractions are deep enough to justify themselves; thin pass-through wrappers fail the deletion test
Tests
- New behavior has test coverage
- Happy path + at least 1 failure/edge case tested
- Tests use real assertions, not just "doesn't throw"
- No brittle tests that break on unrelated changes
Documentation
- Complex logic has
// whycomment (not// what) - Public API changes documented
- Breaking changes documented in CHANGELOG or PR body
Review comment format
**Issue:** [What's wrong]
**Current:** `problematic code`
**Suggested:** `improved code`
**Why:** [reason]
Verdict
- APPROVED — all sections pass
- APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS — minor items, non-blocking
- CHANGES REQUIRED — blocking security, correctness, or test coverage issues
Output: checklist score (X/Y passing) + blocking items with file:line refs + verdict