structured-code-review
Performs a structured five-stage code review covering requirements compliance, correctness, code quality, testing, and security/performance. Each stage uses targeted checklists and categorized feedback (Blocker/Major/Minor/Nit) with actionable suggestions and rationale. Use when the user asks for code review, PR feedback, pull request review, or wants their code checked for bugs, style issues, or vulnerabilities — triggered by phrases like "review my code", "check this PR", "review my changes", "pull request review", or "code feedback".
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:rohitg00/skillkit --skill structured-code-review90
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
Discovery
100%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is an excellent skill description that hits all the marks. It provides specific methodology details (five stages, feedback categories), comprehensive trigger terms covering natural user language, and an explicit 'Use when...' clause with concrete example phrases. The description is distinctive enough to avoid conflicts with other coding-related skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'five-stage code review covering requirements compliance, correctness, code quality, testing, and security/performance' with 'targeted checklists and categorized feedback (Blocker/Major/Minor/Nit) with actionable suggestions and rationale.' | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what (structured five-stage code review with specific stages and feedback categories) AND when (explicit 'Use when...' clause with multiple trigger scenarios and example phrases). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural terms users would say: 'code review', 'PR feedback', 'pull request review', 'bugs', 'style issues', 'vulnerabilities', plus explicit trigger phrases like 'review my code', 'check this PR', 'review my changes', 'code feedback'. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Clear niche focused specifically on code review with distinct methodology (five-stage, categorized feedback). The specific trigger phrases and PR/code review focus make it unlikely to conflict with general coding or documentation skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
77%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured, actionable code review skill with clear workflow stages and concrete examples. The five-stage methodology is easy to follow with specific checklists and feedback templates. Minor improvements could include reducing redundancy between stage checklists and the summary, and trimming explanatory text that Claude doesn't need.
Suggestions
Remove the duplicate summary checklist at the end, or consolidate the stage checklists into just the summary to reduce redundancy
Cut explanatory sentences like 'A structured review catches more issues...' that explain benefits rather than provide instructions
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably efficient but includes some redundancy - the checklist items are repeated in both the stage descriptions and the summary checklist at the end. Some explanatory text like 'A structured review catches more issues' is unnecessary for Claude. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, actionable guidance with specific checklists, example feedback phrases, a clear feedback template with real examples, and a ready-to-use markdown checklist. The feedback levels table is immediately usable. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The five-stage workflow is clearly sequenced with explicit ordering ('First', 'Next', 'Then', 'Finally'). Each stage has a specific focus with clear boundaries, and the final checklist includes a verdict checkpoint. The staged approach itself serves as validation. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is well-organized with clear sections, but everything is inline in one file. The 'Integration with Other Skills' section references other files appropriately, but the main content could benefit from splitting detailed checklists or examples into separate reference files. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
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.