Individual skill

code-review-checklist

Run a systematic multi-pass code review - correctness, design, security, performance, tests - and report findings ordered by severity with concrete, respectful suggestions. Use when someone asks "review this PR", "review this diff", "what's wrong with this change", or wants a pre-merge quality gate on a branch. Do NOT use for a security-only deep audit of a change - use secure-code-review instead - or for writing the ticket or tracking artifact that describes the change - use jira-ticket-writer instead.

skills/code-review-checklist/SKILL.md

Read pinned source

Source commit 97a13607d669157a4a16d5ba79b77f208319f7b9

What was checked

Matches the observed repository HEAD: Yes
Scanner rules are current: No
Repository scan complete: No
Skill scan complete: Yes
Observed behavior: Not checked yet
Last checked: Nov 6, 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): 24
Repository last updated: Oct 13, 2026
License: MIT

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

claude Repository topic
claude-skills Repository topic
skill-me Repository topic
security Derived category
design Derived category
writing Derived category

Files and excerpt

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

Browse files

SKILL.mdcore · 6,265 bytes

Read excerpt


# Code Review Checklist

A good review catches the bug before production and leaves the author better at their job; a bad review rubber-stamps the diff or nitpicks formatting while an injection hole ships. This skill turns review into an ordered procedure - separate passes with separate questions - because reading once for everything at once is how correctness bugs hide behind style comments.

## Inputs to collect

Before the first pass, gather: the diff itself, the stated intent (PR description, ticket, or ask the author - reviewing a change without knowing what it claims to do is guessing), and how the change reaches users (user-facing, internal tool, data migration) since that sets the severity bar. Review the change, not the whole codebase: read surrounding context only where the diff demands it.

## Operating procedure

Run the passes in this order. Correctness comes first because a beautifully designed wrong answer is worthless, and security before performance because a fast vulnerability is worse than a slow safe path. Do each pass as a separate read of the diff.

### Pass 1 - Correctness