pr-review
SKILL.md
Code Review
Review code like a senior engineer - thorough but practical. Focus on things that actually matter. Don't waste time on style nitpicks a linter should catch.
Review Checklist
Use this checklist to guide your review. Need examples of what to look for? Check out references/common-issues.md for code patterns.
Security (Critical)
- Input validation and sanitization
- SQL injection, XSS, command injection risks
- Auth checks in place and correct
- Sensitive data handling (passwords, tokens, PII)
- Dependency vulnerabilities
Bugs & Logic (Critical)
- Null/undefined handling
- Edge cases (empty arrays, null values, boundaries)
- Error handling in place
- Race conditions or concurrency issues
- State management issues
Performance (Important)
- Algorithm complexity (watch for O(n²) where O(n) exists)
- N+1 query problems
- Memory leaks (listeners, subscriptions, closures)
- Blocking operations that should be async
Testing (Important)
- Changes covered by tests
- Tests verify actual behavior
- Edge cases tested
- Error conditions tested
Code Quality
- Code is understandable
- No unnecessary complexity or clever code
- Duplication worth extracting
- Names match what they do
Architecture
- Fits existing patterns (or has good reason not to)
- No breaking changes without migration
- Avoids unnecessary coupling
Output Format
Structure your review like this (see references/review-template.md for detailed examples):
- Summary: One line verdict (Good to merge / Has issues / Needs work)
- Critical: Security, data loss, crashes - must fix before merge
- Important: Bugs, performance, missing tests - should fix
- Minor: Quality improvements - nice to have
- Questions: Things to clarify with the author
- Prevent This: Suggest tooling/config to catch these issues automatically in the future
- Positive Notes: Briefly acknowledge what's done well
Guidelines
- Be specific: file:line, what's wrong, why it matters, how to fix
- Skip style issues that linters catch
- Explain impact, not just "this is wrong"
- Consider trade-offs - sometimes simple is better than perfect
- Briefly note if something is done well, but keep it short
Suggesting Future Mitigations
Only suggest mitigations for recurring patterns or critical issues. Don't suggest tools for one-off mistakes. Focus on automatable checks, not process changes.
TypeScript configuration:
- Type safety issues (
any, implicit types) → Suggeststrict: true,noImplicitAny,strictNullChecksin tsconfig.json - Missing null checks → Suggest
strictNullChecks: true
Linting rules:
- Code quality patterns ESLint could catch → Suggest specific ESLint rules
- Framework-specific issues → Suggest framework ESLint plugins (react-hooks, vue, etc.)
- Formatting inconsistencies → Suggest Prettier in pre-commit hook
Pre-commit hooks:
- Secrets/credentials committed → Suggest trufflehog or git-secrets
- Test failures → Suggest running tests before commit
- Type errors → Suggest tsc --noEmit check
CI/CD checks:
- Security vulnerabilities → Suggest npm audit / dependency scanning
- Missing tests → Suggest coverage thresholds
- Build errors → Ensure build runs in CI
References
Need more guidance? Check these out:
- Review Template - What your review output should look like, with severity categories and example issues
- Common Issues - Quick reference of problems that come up often in reviews, with good/bad code examples
Weekly Installs
4
Repository
saturate/claudeFirst Seen
Jan 24, 2026
Installed on
claude-code2
windsurf1
trae1
opencode1
weavefox1
codex1