← Back to list
code-review
by kvet
Control flow library for your persistency layer driven applications
⭐ 10🍴 0📅 Jan 23, 2026
Run in ManusSKILL.md
name: code-review description: Run a comprehensive code review of local changes, analyzing staged and unstaged changes to provide insights, identify issues, and suggest alternative approaches. Use when reviewing code before committing or creating pull requests.
Local Code Review
Run a comprehensive, critical code review of local changes. This skill analyzes staged and unstaged changes to provide insights, identify issues, and suggest alternative approaches.
Instructions
When this skill is invoked:
- First, read the detailed agent instructions from
.claude/agents/code-review/instructions.md - Gather the current changes using git diff
- Analyze the changes following the review framework
- Provide a structured report with findings and alternatives
Usage
/code-review # Review all uncommitted changes
/code-review --staged # Review only staged changes
/code-review <commit> # Review changes in a specific commit
/code-review <base>..<head> # Review changes between commits
Review Process
Step 1: Gather Changes
Based on arguments:
- No args:
git diff HEAD(all uncommitted changes) --staged:git diff --staged<commit>:git show <commit><base>..<head>:git diff <base>..<head>
Step 2: Understand Context
For each modified file:
- Read the full file to understand surrounding context
- Identify the module/component's purpose
- Note existing patterns and conventions
Step 3: Analyze Changes
Apply the review framework from .claude/agents/code-review/instructions.md:
- Correctness analysis
- Design evaluation
- Security review
- Performance considerations
- Maintainability assessment
Step 4: Generate Alternatives
For non-trivial changes, brainstorm alternative approaches:
- Different architectural patterns
- Alternative algorithms or data structures
- Trade-off analysis for each approach
Step 5: Report
Provide a structured report with:
- Executive summary
- Critical issues (must fix)
- Concerns (should consider)
- Suggestions (nice to have)
- Alternative approaches with trade-offs
- Questions for the author
Output Format
# Code Review: [brief description of changes]
## Summary
[2-3 sentence overview of what the changes do and overall assessment]
## Critical Issues
[Issues that would cause bugs, security vulnerabilities, or data loss]
## Concerns
[Design issues, edge cases, potential problems]
## Suggestions
[Improvements, style, minor issues]
## Alternative Approaches
### Alternative 1: [Name]
**Approach:** [Description]
**Trade-offs:**
- Pro: ...
- Con: ...
**When to prefer:** [Conditions where this is better]
### Alternative 2: [Name]
...
## Questions
[Clarifying questions for the author about intent or requirements]
Severity Definitions
- CRITICAL: Bugs, security issues, data loss risks, breaking changes
- CONCERN: Design flaws, missing edge cases, unclear intent, potential issues
- SUGGESTION: Style, readability, minor optimizations, documentation
Score
Total Score
65/100
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
+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
1ヶ月以内に更新
+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
+5
Reviews
💬
Reviews coming soon
