bmad-review

Review diffs, code, and documents through configurable adversarial, edge-case, verification-gap, and editorial lenses.

6|Updated Aug 29, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/HordRicJr/Akomagni --skill bmad-review-hordricjr
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: bmad-review
Source: https://github.com/HordRicJr/Akomagni/tree/main/bmad-core/.agents/skills/bmad-review
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/HordRicJr/Akomagni --skill bmad-review-hordricjr

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes scripts (resource) and references (resource) components.

What problem does it solve? Reviews of code changes and documents are often shallow or inconsistent, missing edge cases, untested behavior, and structural writing problems. This Skill runs a structured multi-lens review over any diff, spec, or document and reports concrete findings in a canonical format. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Multi-lens review: Run adversarial, edge-case, verification-gap, structure, and prose lenses singly or together, with each lens applying its own method and findings shape. - Configurable workflow: Customize lenses, style guides, reader type, output format, and standing review directives through TOML overrides without editing the shipped skill. - Grounded editorial review: Compute exact per-section word counts with the bundled word_metrics.py script so structural recommendations cite real reduction numbers. - Use Case: After opening a pull request, ask for a critical review of the diff; the edge-case hunter enumerates unhandled branches, the verification-gap lens checks whether tests would catch a regression, and findings arrive as JSON plus a markdown report. ## Quick Start Ask the AI to review the current diff or a document, for example: run a critical review of my uncommitted changes and report edge cases and verification gaps.

Frequently Asked Questions about bmad-review

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I review a diff for edge cases and missing tests?

Invoke the review on the diff and select the edge-case-hunter and verification-gap lenses. The edge-case lens enumerates unhandled branches and boundary conditions, while the verification-gap lens traces changed behavior to consumers and checks whether existing tests would catch a regression.

What review lenses are included and can I add my own?

Shipped lenses are adversarial, edge-case-hunter, verification-gap, structure, and prose. You can add or replace lenses in team or user TOML override files by defining a new lens entry with a code, applicability, and instruction; an empty instruction disables a lens.

Can the review output be JSON instead of a markdown report?

Yes. The output_format setting accepts json, markdown, or both, and a caller can pin an exact output contract. Findings use canonical fields: location, trigger_condition, guard_snippet, and potential_consequence, with lens-specific extras.

Does the editorial review work for documents written for LLM consumption?

Yes. Set reader_type to llm in the configuration or state it in the request. The editorial lenses then calibrate for precision, consistent terminology, and dependency-first ordering instead of human-oriented clarity and engagement.

Why does the adversarial lens never return zero findings?

The adversarial lens requires at least ten concrete findings and treats an empty list as a signal to re-check the content. Other lenses, such as edge-case and verification-gap, consider an empty result valid when nothing is found.