code-review-checklist

Review code changes for correctness, security, performance, and maintainability. Use for PR reviews, code audits, pre-merge checks, or quality validation of Laravel + React + Python code. EXCLUSIVE to reviewer agent.

Safety Notice

This listing is imported from skills.sh public index metadata. Review upstream SKILL.md and repository scripts before running.

Copy this and send it to your AI assistant to learn

Install skill "code-review-checklist" with this command: npx skills add htooayelwinict/claude-config/htooayelwinict-claude-config-code-review-checklist

Code Review Checklist

Exclusive to: reviewer agent

MCP Helpers (Brain + Memory)

🧠 Gemini-Bridge — Deep Code Analysis

mcp_gemini-bridge_consult_gemini(query="Review this code for best practices, security, and performance: [code snippet]", directory=".")

🌉 Open-Bridge — Alternative Analysis

mcp_open-bridge_consult_gemini(query="Review this code for best practices, security, and performance: [code snippet]", directory=".")

💻 Codex-Bridge — Code-Focused Review

mcp_codex-bridge_consult_codex(query="Analyze this code for bugs, anti-patterns, and improvements: [code]", directory=".")

📚 Context7 (Memory) — Up-to-Date Docs

Lookup best practices and anti-patterns:

mcp_context7_resolve-library-id(libraryName="[library]", query="best practices")
mcp_context7_query-docs(libraryId="/[resolved-id]", query="[specific pattern to validate]")

Validation Loop (MANDATORY)

Before completing any review, verify the codebase passes all checks:

composer test           # All PHP tests pass
npm run types          # No TypeScript errors
npm run lint           # No linting errors
./vendor/bin/pint --test  # PHP style OK

Report any failures as Critical findings.

Instructions

  1. Review against project standards in docs/code-standards.md
  2. Run through the checklist below
  3. Report issues by severity (Critical → Warning → Suggestion)

Review Checklist

✅ Correctness

  • Logic handles edge cases
  • Error handling is appropriate
  • Types are correct (no any unless justified)
  • Tests cover new/changed behavior
  • No dead code or unused imports

🔒 Security (OWASP)

  • No secrets or credentials in code
  • User input validated and sanitized
  • Authorization checks in place
  • No SQL injection (use Eloquent/query builder)
  • No XSS (proper escaping, sanitization)
  • CSRF protection enabled
  • Rate limiting considered

⚡ Performance

  • No N+1 queries (use eager loading: with())
  • No unnecessary database calls
  • Large datasets are paginated
  • Indexes exist for filtered/joined columns

🧹 Maintainability

  • Follows patterns in docs/code-standards.md
  • Names are clear and consistent
  • No unnecessary complexity
  • DRY — no copy-paste duplication

🎨 Frontend

  • Uses existing shadcn/ui components
  • Loading and error states handled
  • Accessible (keyboard, labels, contrast)
  • Responsive (mobile + desktop)

📝 Documentation

  • Code comments for non-obvious logic
  • Docs updated if behavior changed
  • Types documented with JSDoc if complex

Laravel Security Checks

CheckVerify
Mass assignment$fillable or $guarded defined
AuthorizationPolicy or Gate used
ValidationFormRequest with rules
CSRF@csrf in forms
SQL injectionNo raw queries with user input

React Security Checks

CheckVerify
XSSNo dangerouslySetInnerHTML
PropsTypeScript interfaces used
SecretsNo sensitive data in client

Severity Guide

LevelCriteriaAction
🚨 CriticalSecurity flaw, data loss, breaks functionalityBlock merge
⚠️ WarningPerformance issue, code smell, missing testRequest fix
💡 SuggestionStyle improvement, better patternOptional

Output Format

## 🔍 Review Summary
[One paragraph overview]

## 🚨 Critical (must fix)
1. [Issue]: [File:Line] — [Why critical]

## ⚠️ Warnings (should fix)
1. [Issue]: [File:Line] — [Recommendation]

## 💡 Suggestions (nice to have)
1. [Suggestion]: [File:Line] — [Improvement]

## ✅ What's Good
- [Positive observation]

Examples

  • "Review this PR before merge"
  • "Check this code for security issues"
  • "Audit changes for performance"

Source Transparency

This detail page is rendered from real SKILL.md content. Trust labels are metadata-based hints, not a safety guarantee.

Related Skills

Related by shared tags or category signals.

Security

security-review

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
Coding

code-review-checklist

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
General

bugfix-and-debug

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
General

ui-ux-design

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review