Claude-skill-registry code-review-checklist

Auto-activates when user mentions code review, reviewing code, PR review, or checking code quality. Provides systematic code review process with TodoWrite checklist.

install
source · Clone the upstream repo
git clone https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry
Claude Code · Install into ~/.claude/skills/
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/data/code-review-checklist" ~/.claude/skills/majiayu000-claude-skill-registry-code-review-checklist-105507 && rm -rf "$T"
manifest: skills/data/code-review-checklist/SKILL.md
source content

Code Review Checklist

Systematic code review process ensuring quality, security, and maintainability.

When This Activates

  • User says: "review this code", "code review", "check this PR"
  • Before creating/merging PR
  • When reviewing changes

Review Checklist (TodoWrite)

Create todos for each item:

1. Functionality

  • Code does what it claims to do
  • Edge cases handled
  • Error handling present
  • No obvious bugs

2. Code Quality

  • Clear variable/function names
  • Functions are single-purpose
  • No code duplication
  • Follows project conventions
  • No commented-out code

3. Testing

  • Tests exist and pass
  • Tests cover new functionality
  • Tests cover edge cases
  • No skipped/disabled tests without reason

4. Security

  • No hardcoded secrets/API keys
  • Input validation present
  • SQL injection prevented (parameterized queries)
  • XSS prevented (sanitized output)
  • Authentication/authorization checked

5. Performance

  • No obvious performance issues
  • Database queries optimized
  • No N+1 query problems
  • Large lists paginated
  • Heavy operations async

6. Documentation

  • Public APIs documented
  • Complex logic explained
  • README updated if needed
  • CHANGELOG updated if needed

Process

  1. Create TodoWrite checklist from items above
  2. Mark in_progress as you review each
  3. Add findings as you discover issues
  4. Complete when reviewed
  5. Present summary with:
    • ✅ Approved items
    • ⚠️ Issues found
    • 🔴 Blockers

Review Findings Format

## Code Review Summary

### ✅ Strengths
- Clear naming conventions
- Good test coverage (85%)
- Error handling comprehensive

### ⚠️ Minor Issues
1. Line 45: Variable name `x` should be `userId`
2. Line 102: Missing error case for null input
3. Missing JSDoc comment on `processData` function

**Suggested fixes:** [code suggestions]

### 🔴 Blockers (MUST FIX)
1. Line 78: **Hardcoded API key** - Move to environment variable
2. Line 123: **SQL injection risk** - Use parameterized query

**These must be fixed before merge.**

### 📊 Metrics
- Files changed: 5
- Lines added: 230
- Lines removed: 45
- Test coverage: 85% → 88%
- Complexity: Medium

### 💡 Recommendations
- Consider extracting `validateUser` to shared util
- Add integration test for auth flow
- Document breaking changes in CHANGELOG

Auto-Checks

Run automated checks:

# Lint
npm run lint

# Type check
npm run typecheck

# Tests
npm test

# Security scan
npm audit

# Check for secrets
git diff --cached | grep -i "api[_-]key\\|password\\|secret\\|token"

Common Issues

IssueFix
Hardcoded secretsMove to
.env
, add to
.env.example
SQL injectionUse parameterized queries
Missing testsAdd tests before merge
Complex functionBreak into smaller functions
Magic numbersExtract to named constants
No error handlingAdd try/catch, validate inputs

Use TodoWrite to track all checklist items. Present summary when complete.