From code-review
Reviews code for bugs, security issues, quality, complexity, and breaking changes. Use when the user asks to review code, check a PR or branch diff, find bugs or security issues, or says "take a look at this."
npx claudepluginhub shawn-sandy/agentics --plugin code-reviewThis skill uses the workspace's default tool permissions.
When reviewing code, systematically check for common issues across multiple
Writes articles, guides, blog posts, tutorials, and newsletters in a voice from examples or brand guidance. For polished long-form content with structure, pacing, and credibility.
Records polished WebM UI demo videos of web apps using Playwright with cursor overlay, natural pacing, and three-phase scripting. Activates for demo, walkthrough, screen recording, or tutorial requests.
Executes repo commands, inspects git state, debugs CI failures, and pushes narrow fixes with exact proof of execution and verification. Use for command runs, repo checks, or evidence-based changes.
When reviewing code, systematically check for common issues across multiple dimensions. Provide specific, actionable feedback with line numbers and code examples. Adapt checklist depth to the code's complexity and context — this is a flexible guide, not a rigid process.
Before reviewing, identify which files to check using this priority order:
Explicit path in message — If the user named a file or directory, use it directly. Skip to the Review Checklist.
Local changes (git status) — If no file was specified, run:
git status --short
Branch diff — Run each in order until files are returned:
git diff main...HEAD --name-onlygit diff master...HEAD --name-onlygit diff HEAD~1 --name-only If files are returned, show the list and
confirm before reviewing. Skip non-reviewable files as above. If all return
empty or fail (e.g., detached HEAD), continue to step 4.Fallback — Ask: "Which file or files would you like me to review?"
Once target files are confirmed, proceed to the Review Checklist for each file.
Read references/review-checklist.md for the full six-dimension checklist. Apply each dimension to every file under review.
Structure the review as follows:
Brief overview of the code's purpose and overall quality (1-2 sentences).
[Low / Medium / High / Very High] — One-sentence rationale (e.g., "Deep nesting in 3 core functions and tightly coupled imports drive the rating.").
List any changes that break existing callers, alter contracts, or risk reintroducing previously fixed behavior. For each:
If none detected: No breaking changes or regression risks identified.
If a breaking change also qualifies as a Critical Issue, list it here only — omit it from Critical Issues to avoid duplication.
Issues that could cause bugs, security vulnerabilities, or data loss. Must be fixed.
Non-critical issues that would improve code quality, maintainability, or performance.
Things the code does well. Reinforce good practices.
See references/example-review.md for a complete sample review demonstrating the expected output format.