receive-review

Process code review feedback through a six-step verify-and-respond protocol.

6|Updated Mar 27, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/greglas75/zuvo --skill receive-review-greglas75
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: receive-review
Source: https://github.com/greglas75/zuvo/tree/main/skills/receive-review
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/greglas75/zuvo --skill receive-review-greglas75

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve? Code review feedback often gets addressed superficially — comments are accepted without verifying the referenced code, or dismissed without technical justification. This Skill enforces a disciplined protocol for handling PR comments, reviewer suggestions, and automated tool findings so every item is read, verified against the actual code, and either fixed or pushed back with evidence. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Six-Step Protocol: Read, Understand, Verify, Evaluate, Respond, and Implement each review item individually, with fixes applied sequentially and tests run after each change. - Source-Based Trust Calibration: Applies different verification rigor depending on whether feedback comes from the user, external reviewers, or automated tools like linters and AI reviewers. - Mandatory Adversarial Review: Runs a scoped adversarial review over changed files after implementation, handling CRITICAL, WARNING, and INFO findings by severity. - Use Case: A reviewer leaves five PR comments claiming a function mishandles null values and suggesting a refactor. The Skill verifies each claim against the actual code, fixes the two valid bugs, pushes back on one incorrect claim with file:line evidence, and runs the test suite after every fix. ## Quick Start Ask the assistant to process the latest PR review comments on your branch using the receive-review protocol and address each item one at a time.

Frequently Asked Questions about receive-review

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I handle PR review comments systematically?

Process each comment through six steps: read all feedback first, restate each request, verify it against the actual code, decide to fix or push back, respond with evidence, then implement fixes one at a time with tests run after each change.

When should I push back on a code review suggestion?

Push back when the suggestion breaks existing functionality, violates YAGNI, is technically incorrect for the language or framework, conflicts with an established architecture decision, or duplicates existing logic. Always include a specific technical reason with file references.

Should I trust automated code review tool findings?

Treat automated findings skeptically and verify each one against the actual code, since linters and AI reviewers flag patterns rather than confirmed bugs. Take security findings seriously but confirm the attack vector is reachable in your specific application.

What order should I address multiple review comments in?

Address correctness bugs first, then security issues, error handling gaps, API contract issues, performance concerns, and finally code clarity. This ensures the most critical items are handled first if the review is only partially addressed.

Why verify review comments against the actual code first?

Reviewers sometimes reference stale code, wrong line numbers, or misread the logic. Reading the referenced file and surrounding context before acting prevents implementing fixes based on incorrect premises.