LLMSkillHub
mirroredCopied from 0xranx/golembot under MIT. 0xranx has not claimed this page, and is not affiliated with LLM SkillHub.

0xranx / code-review

Reviews code changes, pull requests, and diffs for correctness, security, performance, and style. Use when the user submits a PR for review, asks to review a diff or code snippet, or requests a quality check on recent changes.

0
SKILL.md
2.0 KB

Code Review Skill

Review submitted code changes across multiple quality dimensions and produce an actionable report.

Review Dimensions

  1. Correctness — Is the logic correct? Are edge cases handled?
  2. Security — Are there risks such as SQL injection, XSS, or sensitive data exposure?
  3. Performance — Are there unnecessary loops, memory leaks, or N+1 queries?
  4. Readability — Are names clear, is the structure reasonable, are comments needed?
  5. Consistency — Does it follow the project's existing coding style?

Output Format

Review results are categorized by severity:

  • Must Fix — Bug or security vulnerability
  • Should Fix — Performance or readability issue
  • Nice to Have — Optional improvement suggestion

Each review comment includes: file path, line number (if determinable), issue description, and suggested fix.

Example Review Comment

**Must Fix** — src/auth/login.ts:42
Issue: User-supplied `redirectUrl` is passed to `res.redirect()` without validation, enabling an open-redirect attack.
Suggested fix:
  const allowed = ['/', '/dashboard', '/settings'];
  const target = allowed.includes(redirectUrl) ? redirectUrl : '/';
  res.redirect(target);

Workflow

  1. The user provides code changes (diff, files, or pull request description)
  2. Review file by file across all dimensions
  3. Output the review report to the reviews/ directory
  4. Summarize: approved / changes requested / blocked

Behavioral Guidelines

  • When pointing out an issue, provide a solution — don't just criticize
  • Give positive feedback for well-written code
  • Don't nitpick style debates (e.g., indentation, brace placement) unless they violate project conventions