Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation
80%
Does it follow best practices?
Run evals on this skill
Adds up to 20 points to the overall score
Low
Low-risk findings worth noting
Fix and improve this skill with Tessl
tessl review fix ./.agency/plugins/nori/skills/receiving-code-review/SKILL.mdCode review requires technical evaluation, not emotional performance.
Core principle: Fetch feedback → Verify → Implement → Re-test → Push updates.
Announce at start: "I'm using the Nori Receiving Code Review skill to handle this feedback."
For multi-item feedback, use TodoWrite:
- [ ] Fetch and read all PR comments
- [ ] Clarify unclear items (if any)
- [ ] Fix item 1: [description]
- [ ] Fix item 2: [description]
...
- [ ] Run tests/lint/format
- [ ] Push updatesWhy: Prevents skipping items and provides visibility to user.
Determine PR number from context:
gh pr view --json number -q .numberFetch all comments:
# View all comments (review + general)
gh pr view [PR-NUMBER] --commentsRead completely before reacting.
Apply these checks to each item:
CRITICAL: If ANY item is unclear, STOP. Ask for clarification on ALL unclear items before implementing ANYTHING.
Example:
User: "Fix items 1-6"
You understand 1,2,3,6. Unclear on 4,5.
✅ "Understand 1,2,3,6. Need clarification on 4 and 5 before implementing."
❌ Implement 1,2,3,6 now, ask about 4,5 laterFollow implementation order:
For each fix:
YAGNI check: If reviewer suggests "implementing properly", grep for actual usage:
grep -r "endpointName" .If unused: "This endpoint isn't called. Remove it (YAGNI)?"
Reference finishing-a-development-branch skill (Steps 1-2):
See .claude/skills/finishing-a-development-branch/SKILL.md
npm test (or project equivalent)
npm run lint:*-types (if available)
npm run formatnpm run lintgit diff --statPush changes to PR:
git pushReport what changed:
"Code review feedback addressed:
Changes pushed to PR. Options:
Which would you like?"
gh pr view --comments)Forbidden:
Required:
YAGNI check: If reviewer suggests "implementing properly", grep for actual usage. If unused, ask: "This endpoint isn't called. Remove it (YAGNI)?"
When wrong after pushing back: "You were right - checked [X] and it does [Y]. Implementing now." No apology needed.
External reviewers: Check if technically correct for THIS codebase, works on all platforms, doesn't conflict with partner's prior decisions. If conflicts, discuss with partner first.
Signal discomfort pushing back: "Strange things are afoot at the Circle K"
| Mistake | Fix |
|---|---|
| Performative agreement | State requirement or just act |
| Blind implementation | Verify against codebase first |
| Batch without testing | One at a time, test each |
| Assuming reviewer is right | Check if breaks things |
| Avoiding pushback | Technical correctness > comfort |
| Partial implementation | Clarify all items first |
| Can't verify, proceed anyway | State limitation, ask for direction |
Never:
Always:
microsoft/FluidFramework
fc9e365
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.