nw-sc-review-dimensions

Critique code and test quality using structured review dimensions.

Updated Apr 15, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/StudentCristian/nWave-github --skill nw-sc-review-dimensions
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: nw-sc-review-dimensions
Source: https://github.com/StudentCristian/nWave-github/tree/main/.github/skills/nw-sc-review-dimensions
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/StudentCristian/nWave-github --skill nw-sc-review-dimensions

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

This Skill provides a formal framework to critique code and tests in peer reviews by codifying core dimensions such as implementation bias, test quality validation, completeness checks, and priority validation.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Structured review criteria across production code and tests to uncover biases and quality gaps.
  • Guidance on interpretation of findings, with clearly defined dimensions and severity levels.
  • Use Case: during code reviews, teams can apply the dimensions to detect over-engineering, insufficient test coverage, and misaligned acceptance criteria.

Quick Start

Run the review in the current codebase and return a structured YAML report outlining findings across the defined critique dimensions.

Frequently Asked Questions about nw-sc-review-dimensions

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

FAQPage Schema
What are the key dimensions for evaluating code quality during a peer review?

Structured code review dimensions include implementation bias, test quality validation, completeness coverage, and priority validation. These criteria uncover over-engineering, insufficient test coverage, and misaligned acceptance criteria during peer reviews.

How do I detect implementation bias and test quality gaps in a pre-merge code check?

To detect implementation bias and test quality gaps during pre-merge checks, apply structured review criteria across production code and tests. This process returns a structured YAML report outlining findings and severity levels across defined critique dimensions.

Can I use structured review dimensions for post-merge audits of production tests?

Yes, structured review dimensions apply to post-merge audits across production code and tests. The framework evaluates test quality validation and completeness coverage, generating a YAML report that outlines prioritization decisions and quality findings.

What is the best way to assess if acceptance criteria are met during code reviews?

The best way to assess acceptance criteria during code reviews is using a formal framework with priority validation dimensions. This evaluates completeness coverage and misaligned requirements, returning a structured YAML report outlining findings and severity levels.

How do I get a structured report of risk detection findings after running a code review?

To get a structured report of risk detection findings, run the review in your current codebase. This generates a structured YAML report outlining findings across defined critique dimensions, including severity levels and prioritization decisions for quality assessment.