rulereview

Reviews code changes against personal rule files using a prosecute-then-defend adversarial process.

1|Updated May 4, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/wesbragagt/nixos-config --skill rulereview-wesbragagt
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: rulereview
Source: https://github.com/wesbragagt/nixos-config/tree/main/home/skills/rulereview
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/wesbragagt/nixos-config --skill rulereview-wesbragagt

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve? Code reviews against personal coding standards often produce noisy, low-signal findings. This Skill reviews diffs, branches, or files against your own rules in ~/.claude/rules, then adversarially defends each candidate violation so only real violations are reported. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Rule-gated review: Loads every rule file (coding, architecture, refactoring, commit, communication, dispatch) and applies each only when relevant to the change. - Adversarial filtering: Each candidate violation is prosecuted with file:line evidence and concrete cost, then defended against six challenges; survivors only are reported. - Structured verdict report: Outputs PASS or VIOLATIONS FOUND with quoted rule text, minimal fixes, rule collisions, and dropped findings. - Use Case: After finishing a feature branch, ask for a rule review to check the diff against your commit, communication, and architecture rules before opening a PR. ## Quick Start Ask the assistant to run a rule review on my current diff against my rules in ~/.claude/rules.

Frequently Asked Questions about rulereview

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I review code changes against my own coding rules?

Run a rule review targeting your diff, branch, PR number, or file paths. The review loads every rule file in ~/.claude/rules, applies only relevant rules, and reports violations with quoted rule text, file:line, and a minimal fix.

How does adversarial code review reduce false positives?

Each candidate violation is first prosecuted aggressively, then defended against six challenges including whether the rule actually says it, whether the user asked for it, and whether the cost is real. Findings that fail any defense are dropped, not softened into nits.

What rule categories does the review cover?

The review gates six rule files: coding (always), commit (commit messages and PR bodies), communication (human-readable prose), architecture (layered application code), refactoring (behavior-preserving restructures), and dispatch (loops, monitors, and agent schedules).

Does the architecture rule apply to configuration files like Nix or YAML?

No. The review explicitly skips architecture.md for configuration code such as Nix modules, YAML, or shell scripts, because concepts like ports, adapters, and aggregates do not map to them and would produce noise.

What happens when two rules conflict during a review?

Conflicting rules, such as simplicity versus deep modules, are reported in a Rule collisions section with one line per side. The review does not silently pick a side; it asks the user to decide.

Can the rule review fix the violations it finds?

No, the review only reports and never edits files. It offers the single highest-cost violation as a next action, and fixes are applied one rule at a time only when the user explicitly asks.