skills.rest
synaptiai
synaptiaiOFFICIAL
Explore all skills by this author →
WebsiteGitHub

code-review-methodology

Review code changes for compliance, security, correctness, and performance.

6|2|Updated Dec 19, 2025
Search Tags:#security#conventions#code-review#test-coverage#findings#review-synthesis#requirements-mapping
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace --skill code-review-methodology
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent▼
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: code-review-methodology
Source: https://github.com/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/tree/main/plugins/flow/skills/code-review-methodology
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace --skill code-review-methodology

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

This Skill provides a repeatable, stage-gated methodology to evaluate code changes so reviewers can verify acceptance criteria first and then prioritize security, correctness, performance, maintainability, tests, and conventions without wasting effort on broken logic.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Two-stage review: enforce spec compliance (Stage 1) before performing quality assessments (Stage 2).
  • Five-facet evaluation: run parallel checks for security, quality/correctness, conventions, tests, and requirements mapping.
  • Finding synthesis: deduplicate by file:line, prioritize P1→P2→P3, group findings by file, and report counts with confidence levels.
  • Process rules: confidence guidelines, noise filters, boy-scout recognition for small cleanups, review-cycle awareness, and adversarial agent-team protocols for disputed findings.
  • Use case: Triage a pull request by mapping each acceptance criterion to implementation evidence, surface P1 security/correctness issues that block merges, and produce a concise, prioritized finding report.

Quick Start

Review the pull request for unmet acceptance criteria, verify Stage 1 compliance, then run a five-facet review prioritizing security and correctness and output deduplicated P1/P2/P3 findings with confidence assessments.

Frequently Asked Questions about code-review-methodology

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I structure a pull request code review for security and correctness?▼

Run a two-stage code review that enforces spec compliance first, then executes a five-facet evaluation covering security, correctness, performance, maintainability, and tests to produce deduplicated P1/P2/P3 findings.

What is the best way to deduplicate code review findings by file and line?▼

Deduplicate code review findings by grouping issues by file:line references, prioritizing them into P1, P2, and P3 categories, and reporting counts with confidence levels to ensure concise output.

How do I map acceptance criteria to implementation evidence during a code review?▼

Map acceptance criteria to implementation evidence by applying a stage-gated review process that verifies requirements first, mapping each acceptance criterion to specific implementation evidence before running quality assessments.

Can I prioritize code review findings into P1 P2 and P3 severity levels?▼

Yes, you can prioritize code review findings into P1, P2, and P3 severity levels by synthesizing grouped results, deduplicating by file:line, and reporting counts with confidence levels for each finding.

Does this code review methodology check test coverage and conventions?▼

Yes, this code review methodology checks test coverage and conventions as part of a five-facet evaluation that runs parallel checks for security, quality, correctness, conventions, tests, and requirements mapping.

What should I do when code review findings are disputed between team members?▼

Handle disputed code review findings using adversarial agent-team protocols included in the process rules, which also provide confidence guidelines, noise filters, and boy-scout recognition for small cleanups.

Related Skills

Explore More Software Engineering Skills→
LumenWipeLumenWipe
3

code-review

Review code diffs adversarially and triage findings into actionable categories.

Official
Advanced
ZpankzZpankz
7

build-quality-gates

Apply P0, P1, and P2 quality gates to CI pipelines.

Community
Advanced
LuisSambranoLuisSambrano
7

code-review

Perform systematic code review and static analysis across multiple programming languages.

Community
Advanced
Chang-Shih-YungChang-Shih-Yung

health

Aggregate type checker, linter, and test results into a 0-10 composite score.

Community
Advanced