code-review

Adversarial code review that validates implemented work against a story/spec, acceptance criteria, and actual git changes. Use when the user asks to run a code review, review a diff/PR, verify tasks or acceptance criteria are done, or validate story claims versus code.

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" with this command: npx skills add sungkhum/agent-skills-pack/sungkhum-agent-skills-pack-code-review

Code Review

Overview

Perform a rigorous, adversarial review that cross-checks story claims and acceptance criteria against the real code changes. Prioritize concrete, reproducible findings with file and line references. If the code is clean, explicitly say so.

Quick Start

  • Determine scope: story file + repository, or a diff/PR.
  • Identify repo root (use git) and collect changed files via git status --porcelain, git diff --name-only, and git diff --cached --name-only.
  • Load story/spec inputs if provided; otherwise ask for the story/spec or acceptance criteria.
  • Exclude non-application files and folders (.cursor/, .windsurf/, .claude/, and other tooling/config folders unless explicitly requested).

Workflow

Follow the detailed workflow in references/workflow.md. Use these guardrails when adapting it to a standalone repo:

  • If {project-root}/workflow-config.yaml does not exist, treat config values as optional and ask the user for missing items that affect output (language, skill level, story path, etc.).
  • If planning artifacts (architecture/ux/epics) are unavailable, proceed with the story/spec and code changes only; note missing context explicitly.
  • If no story file exists, replace “story validation” with “requirements validation” using the user-provided criteria or a PR description.

Review Expectations

  • Validate each Acceptance Criterion and each task marked complete. Missing ACs are HIGH severity; tasks marked complete but not implemented are CRITICAL.
  • Cross-check story File List against actual git changes; report discrepancies.
  • Cover security, performance, error handling, test quality, and maintainability.
  • If no issues remain after a second pass, report a clean review.

Output

  • Present findings grouped by severity with evidence (file:line), and a short impact statement.
  • If asked, fix issues or create action items; otherwise provide a concise remediation list.
  • When applicable, update story status and sprint status in accordance with the workflow.

References

  • references/workflow.md for the full standalone code review flow.
  • references/discover-inputs.md for input discovery/loading strategy.
  • references/checklist.md for the review completion checklist.

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.

Research

market-research

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
Automation

edge-case-hunter

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
Automation

create-ux-design

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review