code-review

Identifies security, quality, and maintainability issues in pull requests via structured multi-lane review workflow.

Updated Apr 24, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/RJJJJ/project2 --skill code-review-rjjjj
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: code-review
Source: https://github.com/RJJJJ/project2/tree/main/.codex/skills/code-review
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/RJJJJ/project2 --skill code-review-rjjjj

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

Code reviews are often time-consuming and inconsistent; this Skill standardizes and accelerates the process by guiding reviewers through a structured, multi-lane workflow that surfaces security, quality, and maintainability issues with evidence-backed feedback.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Parallel review lanes (code-reviewer and architect) to cover spec compliance, security, performance, and design tradeoffs.
  • Severity-based findings and a deterministic final verdict to guide merge decisions.
  • Architectural Status Contract (CLEAR / WATCH / BLOCK) to surface systemic risks and blockers.
  • Automated synthesis of review results with concrete fixes, file-level evidence, and next steps.
  • Works for pull requests and feature branches, with reusable templates for consistent reviews.

Quick Start

Review the latest code changes and return a structured report with issues, severity, and remediation steps.

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 reviews for pull requests to catch security and maintainability issues?

Automate code reviews by applying a structured, multi-lane workflow that evaluates pull requests for security, quality, and maintainability issues. This provides parallel assessments from code-reviewer and architect perspectives, generating evidence-backed feedback to standardize and accelerate the process.

What is the best way to assess architectural tradeoffs during a code review?

Assess architectural tradeoffs during code reviews by using an Architectural Status Contract that evaluates design decisions. This approach surfaces systemic risks and blockers through parallel review lanes, providing a CLEAR, WATCH, or BLOCK status to guide deterministic merge gating.

Can I get a deterministic merge decision based on code severity ratings?

Yes, you can get a deterministic merge decision by synthesizing severity-based findings from code changes. The workflow aggregates issues identified by code-reviewer and architect lanes into a final synthesis verdict that directly guides merge gating.

How do I structure code review feedback with concrete fixes and file-level evidence?

Structure code review feedback by automating the synthesis of review results into a structured report. This report includes identified issues, severity ratings, concrete fixes, file-level evidence, and actionable next steps, ensuring evidence-backed feedback for code changes.

Does this code review workflow work for feature branches across different projects?

Yes, this code review workflow applies to pull requests and code changes across multiple projects. It uses reusable templates to provide consistent, structured issue reporting and parallel assessments for feature branches.