Systematic pre-commit quality gate using checklist-based review methodology with announcement protocol. Use when reviewing code before commit, performing quality gates, conducting systematic code review, or when fresh-eyes, pre-commit-review, quality-gate, or --review are mentioned. Reviewer agent should load this for thorough reviews.
Systematic pre-commit quality gate using checklist-based review methodology. Triggers on pre-commit reviews, pull requests, quality gates, fresh-eyes requests, or when `--review` is mentioned.
/plugin marketplace add outfitter-dev/agents/plugin install baselayer@outfitterThis skill inherits all available tools. When active, it can use any tool Claude has access to.
references/checklist.mdSystematic pre-commit quality gate → checklist-based review → findings → summary.
<when_to_use>
NOT for: quick sanity checks, trivial typo fixes, formatting-only changes
</when_to_use>
<announcement_protocol>
Review Scope: { files/areas under review } Focus Areas: { specific concerns or general quality gate } Checklist: { full or targeted categories }
Emit findings as discovered:
{FILE_PATH}:{LINE} — { issue description }Review Complete
Findings Summary:
Recommendation: { ship / fix blockers / needs rework }
{ detailed findings below if any found }
</announcement_protocol>
<checklist>any types without justification commentrustfmt and clippy passingResult preferred over panicunwrap/expect outside tests/startupSend/Sync bounds respectedthiserror/anyhow)Emit starting protocol:
Systematically verify each category:
For each finding:
Emit completion protocol:
Use TodoWrite with activeForm for tracking review phases.
</phases><finding_format>
{SEVERITY} {FILE_PATH}:{LINE_RANGE}
Issue: { clear description of problem }
Impact: { consequences if shipped — security risk, runtime error, maintenance burden, etc }
Fix: { concrete steps to remediate }
Pattern: { if issue appears multiple times, note scope }
Example:
◆◆ src/auth/login.ts:45-52
Issue: Password compared using == instead of constant-time comparison
Impact: Timing attack vulnerability — attacker can infer password length and content through response timing
Fix: Use crypto.timingSafeEqual() or bcrypt's built-in comparison
Pattern: Single occurrence
</finding_format>
<severity_guidance>
◆◆ Severe (blocking):
◆ Moderate (should fix):
◇ Minor (consider addressing):
</severity_guidance>
<workflow>Loop: Scan → Verify → Document → Next category
At each finding:
Before completing review:
Check coverage:
Check findings quality:
Check recommendation:
ALWAYS:
NEVER:
Core methodology:
Related skills:
This skill should be used when the user asks to "create a slash command", "add a command", "write a custom command", "define command arguments", "use command frontmatter", "organize commands", "create command with file references", "interactive command", "use AskUserQuestion in command", or needs guidance on slash command structure, YAML frontmatter fields, dynamic arguments, bash execution in commands, user interaction patterns, or command development best practices for Claude Code.
This skill should be used when the user asks to "create an agent", "add an agent", "write a subagent", "agent frontmatter", "when to use description", "agent examples", "agent tools", "agent colors", "autonomous agent", or needs guidance on agent structure, system prompts, triggering conditions, or agent development best practices for Claude Code plugins.
This skill should be used when the user asks to "create a hook", "add a PreToolUse/PostToolUse/Stop hook", "validate tool use", "implement prompt-based hooks", "use ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}", "set up event-driven automation", "block dangerous commands", or mentions hook events (PreToolUse, PostToolUse, Stop, SubagentStop, SessionStart, SessionEnd, UserPromptSubmit, PreCompact, Notification). Provides comprehensive guidance for creating and implementing Claude Code plugin hooks with focus on advanced prompt-based hooks API.