dhh-rails-reviewer

Name: dhh-rails-reviewer
Availability: InStock
Author: andreicr1

Analyze Rails diffs for architectural missteps and anti-Rails patterns.

Updated Mar 14, 2026

Search Tags:#architecture #conventions #code-review #rails #diff-analysis #dhh #rubyonrails

Ready to run

npx skills add https://github.com/Andreicr1/netz-analysis-engine --skill dhh-rails-reviewer-andreicr1

💬 Prompt for ChatGPT / Claude Chat▼

Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: dhh-rails-reviewer
Source: https://github.com/Andreicr1/netz-analysis-engine/tree/main/.gemini/skills/dhh-rails-reviewer
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/Andreicr1/netz-analysis-engine --skill dhh-rails-reviewer-andreicr1

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

Conditional code-review persona that activates when Rails diffs introduce architectural choices, abstractions, or frontend patterns that may fight the framework. It reviews code from an opinionated DHH perspective to safeguard Rails conventions.

Core Features & Use Cases

DHH perspective reviews critique Rails code for architecture drift and non-idiomatic patterns.
Flag Rails convention violations including non-RESTful routing, layered services that hide Rails defaults, or external orchestrations that complicate a monolith.
Guided decision rationale provides actionable reasoning aligned with Rails idioms and maintainability.

Quick Start

Request a DHH-style critique of a Rails diff to receive actionable, Rails-idiomatic recommendations.

Frequently Asked Questions about dhh-rails-reviewer

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

FAQPage Schema

How do I review a Rails diff for architecture drift and convention violations?▼

To review a Rails diff for architecture drift, analyze the changes for non-idiomatic patterns like repository layers or service objects that fight framework defaults. This approach identifies anti-Rails abstractions and delivers critique focused on maintainability and simplicity.

What are common anti-Rails patterns introduced in Ruby on Rails code modifications?▼

Common anti-Rails patterns in Ruby on Rails modifications include non-RESTful routing, layered service objects that hide Rails defaults, and external orchestrations that complicate the monolith. These abstractions deviate from Rails conventions and reduce long-term maintainability.

Can I use a DHH perspective to critique frontend integration in a Rails monolith?▼

Yes, a DHH perspective critiques frontend integration in a Rails monolith by flagging non-standard client-side patterns that deviate from Rails conventions. It provides actionable rationale to safeguard idiomatic Rails patterns and maintain simplicity.

Does this Rails code review approach work with standard layered architecture abstractions?▼

This Rails code review approach actively flags standard layered architecture abstractions like repository layers and service objects. It critiques these patterns from a DHH philosophy perspective because they hide Rails defaults and complicate the monolithic structure unnecessarily.

Why does my Rails diff critique recommend removing service objects and repository layers?▼

A Rails diff critique recommends removing service objects and repository layers because these abstractions fight the framework and deviate from Rails conventions. The DHH philosophy prioritizes simplicity and maintainability over unnecessary architectural layers that hide default framework behavior.

What is the best way to enforce Rails conventions when reviewing complex code modifications?▼

The best way to enforce Rails conventions during complex code modifications is to apply a DHH-style review that identifies architectural missteps. This involves flagging non-RESTful routing and non-idiomatic abstractions to ensure the diff aligns with framework defaults and maintainability.