Claude-skill-registry code-reviewing

Review code for quality, security, and maintainability. Use after code changes are completed and ready for review.

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 "$T/skills/data/code-reviewing" ~/.claude/skills/majiayu000-claude-skill-registry-code-reviewing && rm -rf "$T"
manifest: skills/data/code-reviewing/SKILL.md
source content

Code Review

Review code for quality, security, and maintainability.

When to Use This Skill

Use this skill:

  • After code changes are completed and ready for review
  • Before staging changes for commit
  • As a proactive quality check during development

Context

When invoked, examine:

  • Current git status:
    git status
  • Current git diff (staged and unstaged changes):
    git diff --no-ext-diff HEAD
  • Current branch:
    git branch --show-current
  • Recent commits:
    git log --oneline -40

Review Checklist

Examine all modified files and check:

  • NO DUPLICATED CODE! - Extract common logic into reusable functions
  • Functions 30 lines or shorter - Break down complex functions
  • Well-named functions and variables - Clear, descriptive names
  • Simple and readable code - Avoid unnecessary complexity
  • Proper error handling - Handle edge cases and failures gracefully
  • No exposed secrets or API keys - Use environment variables or config
  • Input validation implemented - Validate all external inputs
  • Good test coverage - Tests for critical paths
  • Performance considerations - No obvious O(n²) or worse patterns

Feedback Organization

Provide feedback organized by priority:

  1. Critical issues (MUST FIX): Security vulnerabilities, bugs, broken functionality
  2. Warnings (SHOULD FIX): Code quality, maintainability concerns
  3. Suggestions (CONSIDER): Improvements that would be nice to have

For each issue, include:

  • Specific location (file, line number)
  • Description of the problem
  • Example of how to fix it

Output

Provide a structured review:

## Critical Issues

- [File:line] Description of issue
  - How to fix: ...

## Warnings

- [File:line] Description of concern
  - Suggestion: ...

## Suggestions

- [File:line] Nice-to-have improvement

If no issues found: "Code review passed. No issues identified."