code-reviewer

Analyzes code diffs and files to identify bugs, security vulnerabilities (SQL injection, XSS, insecure deserialization), code smells, N+1 queries, naming issues, and architectural concerns, then produces a structured review report with prioritized, actionable feedback. Use when reviewing pull requests, conducting code quality audits, identifying refactoring opportunities, or checking for security issues. Invoke for PR reviews, code quality checks, refactoring suggestions, review code, code quality. Complements specialized skills (security-reviewer, test-master) by providing broad-scope review across correctness, performance, maintainability, and test coverage in a single pass.

Quality

96%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Failed to scan

The risk profile of this skill

Quality

Content

92%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The content is well-structured and highly actionable, with a clear workflow featuring validation checkpoints, concrete code examples, and a well-organized one-level-deep reference system. Its only weakness is a small amount of redundant conceptual listing in the Knowledge Reference line.

Suggestions

Trim the 'Knowledge Reference' line listing SOLID/DRY/KISS/YAGNI etc. — Claude already knows these; keep only any non-obvious project-specific conventions.

The description's 'Invoke for PR reviews, code quality checks, refactoring suggestions, review code, code quality' duplicates terms already covered by the preceding 'Use when' clause; consolidate to reduce redundancy.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly lean with no padding about what code review is, but the 'Knowledge Reference' line listing 'SOLID, DRY, KISS, YAGNI, design patterns, OWASP Top 10, language idioms, testing patterns' restates concepts Claude already knows and could be trimmed.	4 / 5
Actionability	Provides copy-paste-ready bad/good code pairs for N+1 queries, magic numbers, and SQL injection, plus a reference table with load conditions, MUST/MUST NOT constraints, and a 7-section output template — fully executable guidance covering common cases.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear 5-step Core Workflow includes an explicit validation checkpoint ('Summarize the PR intent... If you cannot, ask the author to clarify') and a feedback loop ('If critical issues are found in step 3, note them immediately and do not wait until the end').	5 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	A well-signaled reference table points one level deep to six real files in references/ (verified present) each with a 'Load When' condition, keeping the overview concise while splitting detail appropriately.	5 / 5
	Total	19 / 20 Passed

Description

100%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description is comprehensive and explicit, clearly answering both what the skill does and when to invoke it with concrete trigger terms and a distinct niche. Minor redundancy in the trigger phrases ('review code, code quality' repeats) does not materially weaken it.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple concrete actions including identifying 'bugs, security vulnerabilities (SQL injection, XSS, insecure deserialization), code smells, N+1 queries, naming issues, and architectural concerns' and producing a 'structured review report with prioritized, actionable feedback', matching the comprehensive-coverage anchor.	5 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly states what it does ('Analyzes code diffs and files... produces a structured review report') and when to use it ('Use when reviewing pull requests, conducting code quality audits...'), answering both what and when with concrete trigger phrases.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Covers natural user phrases across 'reviewing pull requests, conducting code quality audits, identifying refactoring opportunities, or checking for security issues' plus synonyms 'PR reviews, code quality checks, refactoring suggestions, review code, code quality', matching comprehensive natural-term coverage.	5 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Carves a clear niche with a distinct trigger scope and explicitly distinguishes itself ('Complements specialized skills (security-reviewer, test-master) by providing broad-scope review'), minimizing conflict risk.	5 / 5
	Total	20 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
allowed_tools_field	'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: Jeffallan/claude-skills
Path: skills/code-reviewer/SKILL.md
Commit: 882ef55

Reviewed: 3 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.