skills.rest
jukqaz
jukqazCOMMUNITY
Explore all skills by this author →
GitHub

review

Identify regressions, missing verifications, and unsafe assumptions in code changes.

Updated Aug 23, 2026
Search Tags:#documentation#verification#review#code-review#risk-analysis#regressions
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/jukqaz/stack-pilot --skill review-jukqaz
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent▼
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: review
Source: https://github.com/jukqaz/stack-pilot/tree/main/addons/stackpilot-dev-kit/claude/skills/review
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/jukqaz/stack-pilot --skill review-jukqaz

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

Review changes to identify regressions, missing verifications, and unsafe assumptions before merging.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Detect behavior regressions in CLAUDE review lanes during code changes.
  • Highlight missing verification steps and risky assumptions to improve confidence.
  • Provide a concise set of actionable findings for developers and reviewers.

Quick Start

Run the review lane on the latest patch to surface regressions and verification gaps.

Frequently Asked Questions about review

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I identify regressions in code changes before merging?▼

To identify regressions in code changes, you can run a review lane on the latest patch to surface behavior regressions, missing verification steps, and unsafe assumptions before merging.

What is the best way to find missing verification steps in a patch review?▼

Finding missing verification steps in a patch review involves analyzing code changes to highlight risky assumptions and gaps in testing, providing developers with concise actionable findings to improve merge confidence.

How do I check feature branches for unsafe assumptions during code review?▼

Checking feature branches for unsafe assumptions during code review requires applying non-intrusive analysis with safety constraints to surface risks, loading contextual guidance from REVIEW.md to enforce evaluation standards.

Does the review process work within an automated CLAUDE workflow?▼

Yes, the review process works within the CLAUDE workflow by applying review lanes to feature branches and patches, enforcing non-intrusive analysis with safety constraints during the evaluation process.

What are the limitations of automated risk analysis for code changes?▼

Limitations of automated risk analysis for code changes include relying on contextual guidance loaded from REVIEW.md, constraining analysis to non-intrusive evaluation, and focusing only on regressions and missing verifications.

Related Skills

Explore More Software Engineering Skills→
Shade666Shade666
1

Radberi-UsingGitWorktrees

Create isolated Git worktrees with priority-based directory selection and safety checks.

Community
Advanced
safzanpiranisafzanpirani
1

fix-merge-conflicts

Resolve git merge conflicts and validate builds and tests.

Community
Intermediate
KrismithReddy12KrismithReddy12

health

Calculate a weighted 0-10 code quality score from linters and test runners.

Community
Advanced
whd4whd4

canary

Monitor live deployments for console errors, performance regressions, and page failures.

Community
Advanced