code-review-and-quality

Conducts multi-axis code review. Use before merging any change. Use when reviewing code written by yourself, another agent, or a human. Use when you need to assess code quality across multiple dimensions before it enters the main branch.

Quality

—

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

—

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Quality

Content

77%

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

The content is highly actionable with clear sequenced workflows and concrete checklists. Its main weaknesses are length that could be tightened in a few generic process sections, and references to bundle files (references/*.md) that are not actually present.

Suggestions

Create the referenced references/security-checklist.md and references/performance-checklist.md files (or remove the See Also links) so the signaled references resolve to real bundle files.

Tighten or consolidate the Review Speed, Handling Disagreements, and Honesty in Review sections, which lean on generic process advice, to reduce overall length.

Consider moving the detailed security and performance axis checklists into the referenced files to better apply progressive disclosure and slim the main SKILL.md.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is high-signal with no padding of concepts Claude already knows, but at ~380 lines with a few generic process sections (Review Speed, Handling Disagreements, Honesty in Review) it could be tightened, fitting the anchor for mostly efficient but could be tighter.	2 / 3
Actionability	It provides copy-paste-ready concrete artifacts: a severity-prefix table, numeric change-size thresholds, a splitting-strategies table, named structural remedies, a full review checklist, and a dead-code output template, matching the fully executable/specific anchor.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The five-step Review Process is clearly sequenced with explicit validation (Step 5 "Verify the Verification"), feedback loops, and checklists for the complex review process, matching the clear-sequence-with-validation anchor.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	References are clearly signaled in a "See Also" section pointing to references/security-checklist.md and references/performance-checklist.md, but those bundle files do not exist, and the skill is a long monolith that could split detailed checklists into the referenced files, fitting the some-structure-but-could-be-better-organized anchor.	2 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

85%

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 strong: it covers what the skill does and when to use it with multiple explicit trigger clauses in third-person voice. Trigger-term coverage is good but could include more common user phrasings like "PR review" or "pull request".

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Conducts multi-axis code review" and "assess code quality across multiple dimensions" name the domain plus several concrete actions (multi-axis review, quality assessment, pre-merge gating), matching the anchor that lists multiple specific concrete actions.	3 / 3
Completeness	It answers both what ("Conducts multi-axis code review", "assess code quality across multiple dimensions") and when with three explicit trigger clauses ("Use before merging any change", "Use when reviewing code...", "Use when you need to assess..."), matching the anchor for clearly answering both what and when.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Natural terms like "code review", "merging", and "reviewing code" are present, but common variations a user would say ("PR review", "pull request", "code quality check") are missing, fitting the anchor for some relevant keywords but missing common variations.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The pre-merge multi-axis code-review niche with explicit triggers is clearly distinguishable from other skills and unlikely to fire for the wrong skill, matching the clear-niche anchor.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 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
referenced_paths_exist	Referenced path issues: 2 missing	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: addyosmani/agent-skills
Commit: 70b7506

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.