critical-partner

Reviews pull requests and architectural proposals for defects and risks.

Updated Apr 14, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/BrunoAMSilva/my-config --skill critical-partner-brunoamsilva
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: critical-partner
Source: https://github.com/BrunoAMSilva/my-config/tree/main/coding/skills/critical-partner
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/BrunoAMSilva/my-config --skill critical-partner-brunoamsilva

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

Provides rigorous, structured technical review to catch correctness, security, performance, and design issues that informal reviews and automated linting commonly miss, reducing production incidents and technical debt.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Structured review process with prioritized findings (critical → high → medium → low) and a step-by-step checklist for correctness, quality, and tests.
  • Dual operating modes: Debate Mode for challenging architecture and assumptions, and Review Mode for line-level bug detection and concrete fixes.
  • Concrete remediation including line references, example fixes, testing recommendations, and rationale for trade-offs; ideal for pull requests, architecture proposals, bug triage, and security audits.
  • Example: Use for a PR adding authentication middleware to verify token handling, fix signature verification, and recommend tests for expired and tampered tokens.

Quick Start

Review the provided pull request and return a prioritized list of critical bugs, security vulnerabilities, performance concerns, and concrete code fixes with rationale and test recommendations.

Frequently Asked Questions about critical-partner

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I perform a rigorous code review for security and performance issues in a pull request?

A rigorous code review validates correctness, security, and performance by identifying line-level bugs, classifying prioritized risks, providing concrete code fixes with rationale, and recommending specific tests for the pull request.

What is the best way to validate architectural proposals and catch design flaws before implementation?

Validating architectural proposals requires challenging assumptions using a debate mode, identifying structural design flaws, and evaluating trade-offs to ensure correctness, security, and maintainability before implementation begins.

Can I use structured technical feedback to find bugs that automated linting misses?

Structured technical feedback catches correctness, security, and design issues that automated linting misses by applying a rigorous review process with prioritized risk classification and concrete remediation for complex codebases.

Does critical code review work for security audits and bug triage in existing codebases?

Critical code review works for security audits and bug triage by validating correctness, applying line-level issue identification, verifying signature handling, and recommending tests for edge cases like expired or tampered tokens.

How do I get concrete code fixes with rationale for technical trade-offs during a code review?

Get concrete code fixes with rationale by requesting a structured review that delivers line references, example fixes, testing recommendations, and explicit justification for technical trade-offs found in the codebase.