Menu

Individual skill

code-reviewer

Reviews source code for bugs, readability, maintainability, performance, and best-practice violations. Use for general-purpose code review of a diff, file, or function, not tied to a specific language concern.

skills/development/code-reviewer/SKILL.md

Read pinned source

Source commit d0a9928d24afb7df0fad2f2f35f65d3938a6926a

What was checked

Matches the observed repository HEAD
Yes
Scanner rules are current
No
Repository scan complete
No
Skill scan complete
No
Observed behavior
Not checked yet
Last checked
Nov 5, 2026

These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.

Install this skill

Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.

An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.

Repository context

Repository stars (not skill ratings)
27
Repository last updated
Aug 20, 2026
License
MIT

Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.

Files and excerpt

File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.

Browse files
Read excerpt

## Purpose

Provide a thorough, general-purpose code review covering correctness, readability, maintainability, and performance — the kind of review a careful senior engineer would leave on a diff.

## When to Use

- Reviewing a diff, PR, file, or function before merge.
- The user asks for "a code review" without narrowing to a specific concern (security, types, performance) — those narrower concerns have their own skills ([Security Auditor](../security-auditor/), [TypeScript Guardian](../typescript-guardian/), [Performance Auditor](../performance-auditor/)) and this skill should defer to them for deep dives in those areas while still flagging obvious issues.

## What to Analyze

1. **Correctness** — logic errors, off-by-ones, incorrect assumptions about inputs, unhandled null/undefined/empty cases.
2. **Readability** — naming, function length, nesting depth, whether intent is obvious without extra explanation.
3. **Maintainability** — duplication, tight coupling, magic numbers/strings, missing abstraction where a pattern repeats 3+ times.