React code review
Skill ulpi-io/plugin-marketplace/plugins/giuseppe-trisciuoglio/skills/react-code-review
A curated collection of 7,800+ agent skills for Claude Desktop, sourced from skills.sh
npx -y skills add ulpi-io/plugin-marketplace --skill react-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.
- 1 stars1 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
Provides comprehensive code review capability for React applications, validates component architecture, hooks usage, React 19 patterns, state management, performance optimization, accessibility compliance, and TypeScript integration. Use when reviewing React code changes, before merging pull requests, after implementing new features, or for component architecture validation. Triggers on "review React code", "React code review", "check my React components".
SKILL.md
10.3 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
React Code Review
Overview
This skill provides structured, comprehensive code review for React applications. It evaluates code against React 19 best practices, component architecture patterns, hook usage, accessibility standards, and production-readiness criteria. The review produces actionable findings categorized by severity (Critical, Warning, Suggestion) with concrete code examples for improvements.
This skill delegates to the react-software-architect-review agent for deep architectural analysis when invoked through the agent system.
When to Use
- Reviewing React components, hooks, and pages before merging
- Validating component composition and reusability patterns
- Checking proper hook usage (useState, useEffect, useMemo, useCallback)
- Reviewing React 19 patterns (use, useOptimistic, useFormStatus, Actions)
- Evaluating state management approaches (local, context, external stores)
- Assessing performance optimization (memoization, code splitting, lazy loading)
- Reviewing accessibility compliance (WCAG, semantic HTML, ARIA)
- Validating TypeScript typing for props, state, and events
- Checking Tailwind CSS and styling patterns
- After implementing new React features or refactoring component architecture
Instructions
-
Identify Scope: Determine which React components and hooks are under review. Use
globto discover.tsx/.jsxfiles andgrepto identify component definitions, hook usage, and context providers. -
Analyze Component Architecture: Verify proper component composition — check for single responsibility, appropriate size, and reusability. Look for components that are too large (>200 lines), have too many props (>7), or mix concerns.
-
Review Hook Usage: Validate proper hook usage — check dependency arrays in
useEffect/useMemo/useCallback, verify cleanup functions inuseEffect, and identify unnecessary re-renders caused by missing or incorrect memoization. -
Evaluate State Management: Assess where state lives — check for proper colocation, unnecessary lifting, and appropriate use of Context vs external stores. Verify that server state uses TanStack Query, SWR, or similar libraries rather than manual
useEffect+useStatepatterns. -
Check Accessibility: Review semantic HTML usage, ARIA attributes, keyboard navigation, focus management, and screen reader compatibility. Verify that interactive elements are accessible and form inputs have proper labels.
-
Assess Performance: Look for unnecessary re-renders, missing
React.memoon expensive components, improper use ofuseCallback/useMemo, missing code splitting, and large bundle imports. -
Review TypeScript Integration: Check prop type definitions, event handler typing, generic component patterns, and proper use of utility types. Verify that
anyis not used where specific types are possible. -
Produce Review Report: Generate a structured report with severity-classified findings (Critical, Warning, Suggestion), positive observations, and prioritized recommendations with code examples.
Examples
Example 1: Hook Dependency Issues
// ❌ Bad: Missing dependency causes stale closure
function UserProfile({ userId }: { userId: string }) {
const [user, setUser] = useState<User | null>(null);
useEffect(() => {
fetchUser(userId).then(setUser);
}, []); // Missing userId in dependency array
return <div>{user?.name}</div>;
}
// ✅ Good: Proper dependencies with cleanup
function UserProfile({ userId }: { userId: string }) {
const [user, setUser] = useState<User | null>(null);
useEffect(() => {
let cancelled = false;
fetchUser(userId).then((data) => {
if (!cancelled) setUser(data);
});
return () => { cancelled = true; };
}, [userId]);
return <div>{user?.name}</div>;
}
// ✅ Better: Use TanStack Query for server state
function UserProfile({ userId }: { userId: string }) {
const { data: user, isLoading } = useQuery({
queryKey: ['user', userId],
queryFn: () => fetchUser(userId),
});
if (isLoading) return <Skeleton />;
return <div>{user?.name}</div>;
}
Example 2: Component Composition
// ❌ Bad: Monolithic component mixing data fetching, filtering, and rendering
function Dashboard() {
const [users, setUsers] = useState([]);
const [filter, setFilter] = useState('');
useEffect(() => { /* fetch + filter + sort all in one */ }, [filter]);
return <div>{/* 200+ lines of mixed concerns */}</div>;
}
// ✅ Good: Composed from focused components with custom hooks
function Dashboard() {
return (
<div>
<UserFilters />
<Suspense fallback={<TableSkeleton />}>
<UserTable />
</Suspense>
<UserPagination />
</div>
);
}
Example 3: Accessibility Review
// ❌ Bad: Inaccessible interactive elements
function Menu({ items }: { items: MenuItem[] }) {
const [open, setOpen] = useState(false);
return (
<div>
<div onClick={() => setOpen(!open)}>Menu</div>
{open && (
<div>
{items.map(item => (
<div key={item.id} onClick={() => navigate(item.path)}>
{item.label}
</div>
))}
</div>
)}
</div>
);
}
// ✅ Good: Accessible with proper semantics and keyboard support
function Menu({ items }: { items: MenuItem[] }) {
const [open, setOpen] = useState(false);
return (
<nav aria-label="Main navigation">
<button
onClick={() => setOpen(!open)}
aria-expanded={open}
aria-controls="menu-list"
>
Menu
</button>
{open && (
<ul id="menu-list" role="menu">
{items.map(item => (
<li key={item.id} role="menuitem">
<a href={item.path}>{item.label}</a>
</li>
))}
</ul>
)}
</nav>
);
}
Example 4: Performance Optimization
// ❌ Bad: Unstable callback recreated every render causes child re-renders
{filtered.map(product => (
<ProductCard
key={product.id}
product={product}
onSelect={() => console.log(product.id)} // New function each render
/>
))}
// ✅ Good: Stable callback + memoized child
const handleSelect = useCallback((id: string) => {
console.log(id);
}, []);
const filtered = useMemo(
() => products.filter(p => p.name.toLowerCase().includes(search.toLowerCase())),
[products, search]
);
{filtered.map(product => (
<ProductCard key={product.id} product={product} onSelect={handleSelect} />
))}
const ProductCard = memo(function ProductCard({ product, onSelect }: Props) {
return <div onClick={() => onSelect(product.id)}>{product.name}</div>;
});
Example 5: TypeScript Props Review
// ❌ Bad: Loose typing and missing prop definitions
function Card({ data, onClick, children, ...rest }: any) {
return (
<div onClick={onClick} {...rest}>
<h2>{data.title}</h2>
{children}
</div>
);
}
// ✅ Good: Strict typing with proper interfaces
interface CardProps extends React.ComponentPropsWithoutRef<'article'> {
title: string;
description?: string;
variant?: 'default' | 'outlined' | 'elevated';
onAction?: (event: React.MouseEvent<HTMLButtonElement>) => void;
children: React.ReactNode;
}
function Card({
title,
description,
variant = 'default',
onAction,
children,
className,
...rest
}: CardProps) {
return (
<article className={cn('card', `card--${variant}`, className)} {...rest}>
<h2>{title}</h2>
{description && <p>{description}</p>}
{children}
{onAction && <button onClick={onAction}>Action</button>}
</article>
);
}
Review Output Format
Structure all code review findings as follows:
1. Summary
Brief overview with an overall quality score (1-10) and key observations.
2. Critical Issues (Must Fix)
Issues causing bugs, security vulnerabilities, or broken functionality.
3. Warnings (Should Fix)
Issues that violate best practices, cause performance problems, or reduce maintainability.
4. Suggestions (Consider Improving)
Improvements for code organization, accessibility, or developer experience.
5. Positive Observations
Well-implemented patterns and good practices to acknowledge.
6. Recommendations
Prioritized next steps with code examples for the most impactful improvements.
Best Practices
- Keep components focused — single responsibility, under 200 lines
- Colocate state with the components that use it
- Use custom hooks to extract reusable logic from components
- Apply
React.memoonly when measured re-render cost justifies it - Use TanStack Query or SWR for server state instead of
useEffect+useState - Always include cleanup functions in
useEffectwhen subscribing to external resources - Write semantic HTML first, add ARIA only when native semantics are insufficient
- Use TypeScript strict mode and avoid
anyin component props - Implement error boundaries for graceful failure handling
- Prefer composition over conditional rendering complexity
Constraints and Warnings
- Respect the project's React version — avoid suggesting React 19 features for older versions
- Do not enforce a specific state management library unless the project has standardized on one
- Memoization is not always beneficial — only suggest it when re-render impact is measurable
- Accessibility recommendations should follow WCAG 2.1 AA as the baseline
- Focus on high-confidence issues — avoid false positives on subjective style choices
- Do not suggest rewriting working components without clear, measurable benefit
References
See the references/ directory for detailed review checklists and pattern documentation:
references/hooks-patterns.md— React hooks best practices and common mistakesreferences/component-architecture.md— Component composition and design patternsreferences/accessibility.md— Accessibility checklist and ARIA patterns for React
Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most quality gates skills give
Counted across 1,195 of the 2,094 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-08-06
- read the output and check the exit codein 55 of 1195, across 14 files
- verify requirements using a line-by-line checklistin 53 of 1195, across 12 files
- identify the verification command proving the claimin 53 of 1195, across 12 files
- run the full verification commandin 51 of 1195, across 11 files
- verify output confirms the claimin 49 of 1195, across 10 files
- check version control diff after agent delegationin 45 of 1195, across 5 files
- state claim with evidencein 43 of 1195, across 3 files
- run the test suitein 32 of 1195, across 24 files
- keep state in memory by defaultin 27 of 1195, across 6 files
- make prototype runnable with one commandin 26 of 1195, across 5 files
- detect the package manager from lockfilesin 24 of 1195, across 5 files
- produce a verification reportin 23 of 1195, across 12 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.