skills.rest
BigPapiCB
BigPapiCBCOMMUNITY
Explore all skills by this author →
GitHub

code-review

Guide pull request reviews through a six-step checklist with severity levels.

2|Updated Feb 6, 2026
Search Tags:#performance#debugging#security#maintainability#code-review#pull-request#review-checklist
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/BigPapiCB/Universal-Claude-Skills --skill code-review-bigpapicb
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent▼
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: code-review
Source: https://github.com/BigPapiCB/Universal-Claude-Skills/tree/main/code-review
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/BigPapiCB/Universal-Claude-Skills --skill code-review-bigpapicb

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

This Skill provides a repeatable, thorough checklist to evaluate code changes for correctness, security, and maintainability, reducing review variability and leftover defects.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Decision-tree PR review workflow guiding reviewers through the appropriate steps.
  • Severity levels (CRITICAL, MAJOR, MINOR, NITPICK) to prioritize findings.
  • Clear Output Format and a reusable anti-pattern and checklist to improve code quality.
  • Use Case: On a PR, run the skill to validate code changes across languages and generate prioritized findings.

Quick Start

Review the latest pull request following the six steps and report findings with actionable fixes.

Frequently Asked Questions about code-review

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I automate code review for pull requests across different programming languages?▼

Automated code review for pull requests uses a structured six-step process to evaluate changes across languages, checking correctness, security, performance, and maintainability. This enforces consistency and generates prioritized findings with actionable fixes.

What's the best way to prioritize findings during a pull request review?▼

Prioritizing pull request review findings uses severity levels like CRITICAL, MAJOR, MINOR, and NITPICK. This classification helps reviewers focus on high-impact defects first, reducing leftover issues and aligning with best practices.

How does a systematic review checklist improve software maintainability?▼

A systematic review checklist improves software maintainability by guiding reviewers through a decision-tree workflow for each pull request. This repeatable process reduces review variability and ensures all code changes meet quality standards.

Can I use a structured code review workflow for debugging and performance checks?▼

Structured code review workflows support debugging and performance checks by validating code changes against a configurable checklist. This process identifies defects and bottlenecks early, ensuring software projects maintain optimal performance.

Does a standardized review process work without external dependencies?▼

A standardized review process works without external dependencies by applying an internal six-step evaluation framework. It uses explicit output formats and severity levels to guide reviewers through correctness and security checks independently.

Related Skills

Explore More Software Engineering Skills→
warpdotdevwarpdotdev
292

security-review-pr

Identify security concerns in pull request diffs and merge findings into review.json.

Official
Advanced
tuanldastuanldas

requesting-code-review

Generate confidence-scored code review findings with actionable fixes.

Community
Advanced
I-OnlabsI-Onlabs
3

code-auditor

Audit codebases across architecture, quality, security, and performance to produce prioritized health reports.

Community
Advanced
RaNDoM6913RaNDoM6913
1

pre-deploy-validator

Run pre-deploy checks for compilation, linting, tests, and security scans.

Community
Advanced