smithery/mtthsnc

use-review-request

Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements

Installation

$ npx skills add smithery/mtthsnc --skill use-review-request

Similar popular skills

Related neighbors and high-traction skills in the same topics — useful to compare before installing.

Also in this package

Other skills from smithery/mtthsnc.

npx skills add smithery/mtthsnc

Browse all from smithery/mtthsnc

More details

Agent compatibility

Declared targets from SKILL.md / docs. Unmarked agents are not listed — the skill may still install via the CLI.

Claude Code Not declared
Cursor Not declared
Codex Not declared
GitHub Copilot Not declared
Windsurf Not declared
Gemini CLI Not declared
Cline Not declared
OpenCode Not declared

Package contents

Files included with this skill beyond the listing page.

  • skill md SKILL.md 1,498 B
  • docs SUMMARY.md 133 B

History

  1. First recorded snapshot · 0 installs

SKILL.md

Dispatch autonome:code-reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade.

Core principle: Review early, review often.

When to Request Review

Mandatory:

  • After each task in subagents-dispatch development
  • After completing major feature
  • Before merge to main

Optional but valuable:

  • When stuck (fresh perspective)
  • Before refactoring (baseline check)
  • After fixing complex bug

How to Request

1. Get git SHAs:

BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1)  # or origin/main
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

2. Dispatch code-reviewer subagent:

Use Task tool with autonome:code-reviewer type, fill template at code-reviewer.md

Placeholders:

  • {WHATWASIMPLEMENTED} - What you just built
  • {PLANORREQUIREMENTS} - What it should do
  • {BASE_SHA} - Starting commit
  • {HEAD_SHA} - Ending commit
  • {DESCRIPTION} - Brief summary

3. Act on feedback:

  • Fix Critical issues immediately
  • Fix Important issues before proceeding
  • Note Minor issues for later
  • Push back if reviewer is wrong (with reasoning)

Red Flags

Never:

  • Skip review because "it's simple"
  • Ignore Critical issues
  • Proceed with unfixed Important issues
  • Argue with valid technical feedback

If reviewer wrong:

  • Push back with technical reasoning
  • Show code/tests that prove it works
  • Request clarification