SKILL.md
Summary
Use this skill for structured pre-merge review. The default stance is blocker-first and risk-first, with concrete fixes included when they are clear and high confidence.
Inputs
- Change under review: commit range, PR, branch diff, patch, or changed-file list.
- Scope such as full review, security-only, architecture-only, UX-only, or release-blocking issues only.
- Purpose, linked issue, or expected behavior.
- Constraints, exclusions, or sensitive areas.
- Existing evidence such as tests run, screenshots, benchmarks, or rollout notes.
If the review target is omitted, review the current branch diff against the repository default branch.
How to run
- Inspect the actual diff before launching any reviewers.
- Choose the default review lenses: code-and-QA, architecture, and security.
- Follow the detailed workflow in
references/review-workflow.mdfor reviewer selection and synthesis. - Use
references/subagent-prompts.mdwhen dispatching specialist reviewers. - Render the final review from the existing templates and schema references.
Expected outputs
The final user-visible deliverable is markdown only. Internally, the parent reviewer may assemble json_review data, but it must not be printed raw.
The final review should:
- Put must-change findings first.
- Separate findings into Blockers, Bugs, Breaking Changes, Suggestions, and Nitpicks.
- Include a project-relative file path and specific line or range for every finding.
- Preserve clear, high-confidence remediation ideas when available.
- Distinguish confirmed findings from open questions.
Blocker-first policy
- Prioritize correctness, data integrity, security boundary issues, broken deploy or runtime behavior, and critical test gaps.
- Downgrade style-only comments unless they materially affect maintainability, accessibility, or future defect risk.
- Route pure cosmetic commentary to Nitpicks.
Case references
| Case | Reference |
|---|---|
| Full review workflow, agent discovery, and synthesis rules | references/review-workflow.md |
| Reusable specialist subagent prompts | references/subagent-prompts.md |
| Internal review schema and scoring rules | references/json-review-schema.md |
| Parent reviewer rendering contract | templates/reviewer-output.md |
| Specialist subagent output contract | templates/subagent-output.md |
Gotchas
- Do not present raw subagent output as the final review.
- Do not invent fixes unsupported by the diff or surrounding code.
- Do not drop file and line metadata during synthesis.
- Do not paste massive raw diffs into one prompt; chunk large changes.
Routing examples
Review this PR using code-and-QA plus the relevant specialists in parallel.Do a security-heavy review of these auth changes and only report merge blockers.Review this front-end diff with UX and code-and-QA lenses.Run a parallel review on this branch and tell me if there are rollout risks before merge.
Negative:
Fix the failing test in this branch.Tell me whether this builds.