Marketplace code-review
Perform comprehensive code reviews covering security, style, performance, and best practices. Use when reviewing code changes before commit or merge, auditing existing code, or checking for vulnerabilities.
install
source · Clone the upstream repo
git clone https://github.com/aiskillstore/marketplace
Claude Code · Install into ~/.claude/skills/
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/aiskillstore/marketplace "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/ancplua/code-review" ~/.claude/skills/aiskillstore-marketplace-code-review-ad884a && rm -rf "$T"
manifest:
skills/ancplua/code-review/SKILL.mdsource content
Skill: code-review
Purpose: Perform comprehensive code reviews covering security, style, performance, and best practices.
When to use this Skill
Use this Skill when:
- Reviewing code changes before commit or merge.
- Auditing existing code for issues.
- Checking for security vulnerabilities.
- Ensuring code follows project conventions.
Review workflow
1. Gather context
Before reviewing:
# See what changed git diff --stat git diff # Or for specific files git diff path/to/file
Understand:
- What is the purpose of these changes?
- Which files are affected?
- What is the expected behavior?
2. Security audit
Check for:
- Injection vulnerabilities: SQL, command, XSS.
- Authentication issues: Weak auth, missing checks.
- Authorization flaws: Missing permission checks.
- Sensitive data exposure: Hardcoded secrets, logs.
- Insecure dependencies: Known vulnerabilities.
Red flags:
- String concatenation in queries.
,eval()
, or similar.exec()- Hardcoded credentials or API keys.
- Missing input validation.
- Overly permissive CORS.
3. Style check
Verify:
- Naming conventions: Clear, consistent names.
- Code formatting: Consistent indentation, spacing.
- Documentation: Comments where needed.
- File organization: Logical structure.
- Import ordering: Consistent imports.
4. Performance review
Look for:
- N+1 queries: Database access in loops.
- Unnecessary computation: Repeated calculations.
- Memory issues: Large allocations, leaks.
- Blocking operations: Sync in async contexts.
- Inefficient algorithms: O(n²) where O(n) possible.
5. Best practices
Check:
- Error handling: Proper try/catch, error types.
- Logging: Appropriate log levels.
- Testing: Test coverage for changes.
- DRY principle: No unnecessary duplication.
- Single responsibility: Functions do one thing.
6. Generate report
Summarize findings by severity:
## Code Review Summary ### Critical (must fix) - None found ### High (should fix) - SQL injection risk in UserService.ts:42 ### Medium (consider fixing) - Function exceeds 50 lines in ApiHandler.ts:120 ### Low (nice to have) - Consider extracting magic number to constant ### Info - Good use of early returns in validation logic
Severity levels
| Level | Description | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Security vulnerability, data loss | Must fix now |
| Bugs, significant issues | Fix before merge |
| Code quality, maintainability | Fix soon |
| Minor improvements | Nice to have |
| Observations, positive feedback | No action needed |
Common patterns
SQL injection
Bad:
const query = `SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = ${userId}`;
Good:
const query = 'SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = ?'; db.query(query, [userId]);
XSS vulnerability
Bad:
element.innerHTML = userInput;
Good:
element.textContent = userInput;
N+1 query
Bad:
const users = await getUsers(); for (const user of users) { user.posts = await getPosts(user.id); }
Good:
const users = await getUsersWithPosts();
Missing error handling
Bad:
const data = JSON.parse(input);
Good:
try { const data = JSON.parse(input); } catch (error) { logger.error('Invalid JSON input', { error }); throw new ValidationError('Invalid input format'); }
Integration
With autonomous-ci
- Make changes.
- Run
to check.code-review - Fix issues found.
- Run
to verify.autonomous-ci
With smart-commit
- Make changes.
- Run
to check.code-review - Fix issues.
- Use
to commit.smart-commit
Checklist
Complete review checklist:
- Security vulnerabilities checked.
- Code style verified.
- Performance issues identified.
- Error handling reviewed.
- Test coverage assessed.
- Documentation checked.
- Report generated with findings.