Back to list
timequity

code-review

by timequity

Claude Code plugins for developers

2🍴 0📅 Jan 24, 2026

SKILL.md


name: code-review description: | Code review workflow and best practices. Use when: reviewing PRs, receiving feedback, or preparing code for review. Triggers: "code review", "review", "pr review", "pull request", "feedback", "review changes".

Code Review

Core Principle

Technical correctness over social comfort.

Don't say "Great point!" or "You're absolutely right!" — analyze the feedback technically and respond with substance.

Review Checklist

□ Does it work? (logic, edge cases)
□ Is it secure? (injection, auth, secrets)
□ Is it tested? (coverage, edge cases)
□ Is it readable? (naming, structure)
□ Is it maintainable? (complexity, coupling)
□ Does it follow patterns? (consistency)

Issue Severity

LevelWhatAction
CriticalSecurity holes, data loss, crashesMust fix before merge
ImportantBugs, performance issues, bad patternsShould fix
MinorStyle, naming, small improvementsNice to have
NitpickPersonal preferenceComment only, don't block

Giving Feedback

# Good feedback format:

**Issue**: [What's wrong]
**Why**: [Why it matters]
**Suggestion**: [How to fix]

# Example:
**Issue**: SQL query uses string concatenation
**Why**: Vulnerable to SQL injection
**Suggestion**: Use parameterized queries:
`db.query('SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = $1', [userId])`

Be Specific

# BAD
"This code is confusing"

# GOOD
"The variable `data` doesn't describe what it contains.
Consider renaming to `userProfiles` to match its type."

Praise Meaningfully

# BAD
"LGTM!" (says nothing)

# GOOD
"Clean extraction of the validation logic into a separate function —
makes it much easier to test."

Receiving Feedback

Don't

  • Take it personally
  • Argue without investigating
  • Dismiss without explanation
  • Say "You're right!" without checking

Do

  • Investigate the concern technically
  • Test the suggested approach
  • Explain your reasoning if you disagree
  • Ask clarifying questions
# Good response to feedback:

"I tested this approach and [result].
The original implementation handles [edge case] because [reason].
However, your suggestion would work if we also [modification].
Should I make that change?"

Verification Before Claiming Done

Before saying "done" or "fixed":

□ Run tests locally
□ Check the specific scenario mentioned
□ Verify the fix doesn't break related code
□ Test edge cases

PR Description Template

## What

[Brief description of changes]

## Why

[Motivation, link to issue]

## How

[Implementation approach]

## Testing

- [ ] Unit tests added/updated
- [ ] Manual testing done
- [ ] Edge cases covered

## Screenshots

[If UI changes]

Quick Commands

# Prepare review (get diff stats)
git diff main...HEAD --stat
git log main..HEAD --oneline

# Review specific commits
git show <sha>
git diff <sha1>..<sha2>

Score

Total Score

40/100

Based on repository quality metrics

SKILL.md

SKILL.mdファイルが含まれている

+20
LICENSE

ライセンスが設定されている

0/10
説明文

100文字以上の説明がある

0/10
人気

GitHub Stars 100以上

0/15
最近の活動

3ヶ月以内に更新がある

0/10
フォーク

10回以上フォークされている

0/5
Issue管理

オープンIssueが50未満

+5
言語

プログラミング言語が設定されている

+5
タグ

1つ以上のタグが設定されている

0/5

Reviews

💬

Reviews coming soon