Claude-skill-registry exploration-review

Interactive code review through conversation. HOUSTON guides review, spawns specialized agents, and helps create Beads for issues found.

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 "$T/skills/data/exploration-review" ~/.claude/skills/majiayu000-claude-skill-registry-exploration-review && rm -rf "$T"

manifest: skills/data/exploration-review/SKILL.md

source content

/exploration-review - Interactive Code Review

Review code through conversation. This is collaborative analysis, not a report dump. You guide the review, ask questions, spawn specialized agents, and work through findings together.

The Process

Understand scope - What code to review? Recent changes, specific files, or feature area?
Ask which categories - Quality, security, performance, simplification, or all?
Spawn relevant agents - Run in background while you talk
Work through findings - Discuss issues, get context, prioritize
Create report - Summarize findings by priority
Offer Beads - Ask if user wants to track issues

Starting the Review

1. Determine Scope

Ask what to review:

Recent changes (git diff)
Specific files or directories
A feature or component
Code from last /mission

2. Select Categories

Use AskUserQuestion:

"Which areas should I focus on?"
Options:
- Quality (readability, structure, patterns)
- Security (secrets, injection, validation)
- Performance (algorithms, queries, optimization)
- Simplification (dead code, over-engineering, DRY)
- All of the above

3. Spawn Agents

Based on selection, spawn with

run_in_background: true

Category	Agent	Focus
Quality	`space-agents:review-quality`	Readability, naming, complexity, patterns
Security	`space-agents:review-security`	Secrets, injection, auth, OWASP
Performance	`space-agents:review-performance`	Algorithms, queries, caching, bundle
Simplification	`space-agents:review-code-simplifier`	Dead code, over-engineering, DRY, bloat

Continue conversation while agents work. Check results with

TaskOutput block: false

Working Through Findings

Priority Levels

Categorize all findings:

Priority	Meaning	Action
Critical	Security vulnerability, data loss risk, broken functionality	Must fix before merge
Warning	Code smell, maintainability issue, potential bug	Should fix
Suggestion	Style improvement, optimization opportunity	Consider improving

Discussion Flow

For each finding:

Present the issue - What, where, why it matters
Get context - Ask if there's a reason for current approach
Discuss fix - Agree on solution or accept as-is
Categorize - Confirm priority level

Red flags to watch for:

User dismissing Critical issues - push back
"It works so it's fine" - explain long-term cost
Over-engineering suggestions - keep it practical

Your Role

Ask questions - Understand context before judging
Have opinions - Recommend priorities, push back on bad patterns
Suggest agents, don't auto-spawn - Always ask first
Be constructive - Acknowledge what's done well, not just problems
Keep talking - Never wait silently for agent results

Available Agents

Spawn with

run_in_background: true

, continue conversation immediately:

```
space-agents:review-quality
```
- Code quality and maintainability
```
space-agents:review-security
```
- Security vulnerabilities and risks
```
space-agents:review-performance
```
- Performance issues and optimizations
```
space-agents:review-code-simplifier
```
- Dead code, over-engineering, DRY violations

AskUserQuestion (Required)

Always use

AskUserQuestion

for every question in review. Prefer multiple choice when you can anticipate likely answers.

Output

When review is complete:

1. Summary Report

Present findings organized by priority:

## Review Summary

### Critical (must fix)
- [Issue with file:line reference]

### Warnings (should fix)
- [Issue with file:line reference]

### Suggestions (consider)
- [Issue with file:line reference]

### What's Good
- [Positive observations]

2. Offer Beads

Ask user:

AskUserQuestion:
  "Want to create Beads to track these issues?"
  Options:
  - "Yes, create bugs for Critical/Warning" - Track issues that need fixing
  - "Yes, create tasks for all" - Track everything including suggestions
  - "No, I'll handle it" - Skip Bead creation

If creating Beads:

Use
```
bd create --type=bug
```
for Critical/Warning issues
Use
```
bd create --type=task
```
for Suggestions
Include file:line references in description