pr-review-assistant

Evaluate GitHub PRs against Amplihack philosophy and generate compliance reports.

2|22|Updated Oct 9, 2025
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/rysweet/azlin --skill pr-review-assistant
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: pr-review-assistant
Source: https://github.com/rysweet/azlin/tree/main/.claude/skills/pr-review-assistant
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/rysweet/azlin --skill pr-review-assistant

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

This Skill helps Claude evaluate pull requests to ensure alignment with amplihack's core principles—ruthless simplicity, modular brick design, and zero-BS implementation. It identifies over-engineering, unclear module contracts, and gaps in tests, providing concrete, context-rich feedback.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Philosophy-aligned PR reviews: Check for unnecessary abstractions, single-responsibility boundaries, and explicit contracts.
  • Brick module verification: Validate public interfaces and separation of concerns.
  • Concrete improvements: Point to exact file:line issues, with code examples for simplification.

Quick Start

Claude, review PR #123 against our philosophy to get a structured critique and recommended edits.

Frequently Asked Questions about pr-review-assistant

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I review pull requests to enforce code simplicity and modular design?

PR review against simplicity principles identifies over-engineering and unclear module boundaries by assessing ruthless simplicity, modular architecture, and zero-BS implementation with concrete line-referenced feedback and compliance reports.

What should I look for when evaluating PR changes for architectural philosophy alignment?

Evaluate single-responsibility boundaries, explicit module contracts, unnecessary abstractions, test coverage gaps, and documentation clarity. The review produces structured feedback pointing to exact file:line issues with recommended simplifications.

Can I validate brick module interfaces and separation of concerns in code reviews?

Yes. This approach checks public interfaces against modular brick design principles, verifies separation of concerns, and provides concrete improvements with code examples for refactoring toward clearer contracts.

How do I get structured feedback on whether a GitHub PR meets our design principles?

Submit a PR for philosophy-aligned review to receive a structured compliance report assessing ruthless simplicity, modular design, and implementation clarity, plus module-spec guidance for new components and actionable edit recommendations.

What's the difference between traditional code review and philosophy-aware PR evaluation?

Philosophy-aware review emphasizes architectural principles—ruthless simplicity, modular brick design, zero-BS implementation—over style alone, producing module contracts and refactor guidance alongside functional compliance.

When should I use philosophy-driven PR review instead of standard code review?

Use it when evaluating pull requests, code file changes, or refactors against explicit design philosophy; it's essential for teams enforcing simplicity principles and modular architecture across codebases.