Invoke when the user asks to review, check, audit, or look over Qt6 C++ code — or suggest before committing. Runs deterministic linting (60+ rules) then six parallel deep- analysis agents covering model contracts, ownership, threading, API correctness, error handling, and performance. Reports only high-confidence issues (>80/100) with structured mitigations. Read-only — never modifies code.
72
90%
Does it follow best practices?
Run evals on this skill
Adds up to 20 points to the overall score
Passed
No findings from the security scan
A structured, read-only code review skill for Qt6 C++ code that combines deterministic linting with parallel agent-driven deep analysis across six focused domains.
/qt-cpp-review — review using universal Qt6 C++ rules only/qt-cpp-review framework — also apply Qt framework/module
development rules (BC, exports, d-pointers, qdoc, QML
versioning)If $ARGUMENTS contains "framework", enable framework mode.
If the argument is not passed, auto-detect by scanning the first
few files in scope for framework signals. If two or more of
the following are found, suggest to the user:
"This looks like Qt framework/module code. Run
/qt-cpp-review framework to also apply framework-specific
rules (BC, exports, qdoc, QML versioning)?"
Framework signals (any two = likely framework code):
QT_BEGIN_NAMESPACE / QT_END_NAMESPACEQ_CORE_EXPORT, Q_GUI_EXPORT, Q_WIDGETS_EXPORT, or any
Q_*_EXPORT macro#include <QtModule/private/*_p.h> (private headers)Q_DECLARE_PRIVATE, Q_D(), Q_Q()qt_internal_add_module or qt_add_module in CMakeLists.txtsync.profile or .qmake.conf in the repository rootDo not auto-enable framework mode — only suggest it. Let the user confirm.
When framework mode is enabled:
--framework to the linter (if supported)references/qt-framework-checklist.md alongside the
universal checklistDetect the user's intended scope from their language:
Triggered by language like: "this commit", "these changes", "the diff", "what I changed", "my changes", "staged changes", "outstanding changes", "before I commit"
Action: Run git diff (unstaged) and git diff --cached
(staged) to obtain the changeset. If the user says "this commit",
use git diff HEAD~1..HEAD. Review only the changed lines plus
sufficient surrounding context (±50 lines) for understanding.
Only report issues found in the changed lines — do not report
issues in unchanged surrounding context.
Triggered by language like: "review the codebase", "audit the project", "check the repository", "review src/", or when a specific file/directory path is given without commit language.
Action: Glob for *.cpp, *.h, *.hpp files in the
specified scope. Review all matched files.
The review proceeds in three phases. Never skip a phase.
Run the unified Python linter against the target files. Requires Python 3.6+ (no external dependencies). If Python is not available, warn the user and skip to Phase 2.
python3 references/lint-scripts/qt_review_lint.py <files...>
# If python3 is not found, fall back to:
python references/lint-scripts/qt_review_lint.py <files...>This single-pass scanner encodes all mechanically-checkable rules from the Qt review guidelines. It reads each file once and evaluates all rules per line. Output is deterministic and repeatable. The linter is authoritative — do not second-guess its output.
Collect all output before proceeding to Phase 2.
Rule categories (60+ checks):
Launch six focused review agents in parallel. Name each agent descriptively when launching (e.g. "Agent 1: Model Contracts") to provide progress visibility. Each agent has a tight scope and a specific checklist. Agents are READ-ONLY — they must never edit or write files.
Tool-agnostic agent contract: Each agent described below is a self-contained review mission. In Claude Code, launch them as general-purpose subagents. In other tools, implement each as whatever subprocess, prompt chain, or analysis pass the tool supports. The key requirement is that each agent:
See Agent missions below for the six agents.
Merge lint script output and all agent findings. Deduplicate (same file+line+issue = one finding). Apply confidence scoring. Format the final report using the output format below.
Launch all six agents in parallel. Pass each agent:
Each agent should read all files in scope, then focus on its assigned categories.
Scope: QAbstractItemModel signal protocol, role system, index validity, proxy model correctness.
Check for:
beginInsertRows/endInsertRows balance — every structural
model change (add/remove/move) must use the correct begin/end
pairs. layoutChanged is NOT a substitute for insert/remove.roleNames() returning roles that data() does not handle
(missing switch cases, fall-through to default)dataChanged emitted with empty roles vector (forces full
refresh instead of targeted update)beginRemoveRows called with first > last (edge case when
container is empty — QAIM contract violation)flags() returning inappropriate flags (e.g. ItemIsEditable
for non-editable items)setData() returning true without emitting dataChangeddata()/index() APIReferences: references/qt-review-checklist.md § Model
Contracts
Scope: Memory ownership, parent-child, resource cleanup, Rule of Five, RAII correctness.
Check for:
new is visible and
no corresponding delete/deleteLater/smart-pointer wrapping
exists (Rule of Five violation)deleteLater() on QNetworkReply in finished handlersQ_ASSERT wrapping side-effectful expressions (compiled out
in release builds — the side effect disappears)Q_ASSERT as the sole null guard (crashes in release)Q_DISABLE_COPY_MOVEnew but no parent and no other
lifecycle management (scope, smart pointer, explicit delete)QObject::connect() called with potentially null
sender/receiver outside a null guard (runtime warning)m_recentlyAccessed-style tracking lists that maintain
pointers to objects that may be deleted elsewhere (dangling)References: references/qt-review-checklist.md § Ownership
& Lifecycle, § Polymorphic Classes, § RAII Classes
Scope: Cross-thread QObject access, mutex consistency, signal emission from worker threads.
Check for:
QtConcurrent::run()
or QThread worker without synchronization (mutex, atomic,
queued connection, or other thread-safe primitive)Qt::DirectConnection (or explicit non-queued connections)
to main-thread receiversaddNote, removeRows, etc.) from
background threadsQList, QHash) modified from multiple
threads without consistent synchronizationm_operationCount++ from multiple threads)References: references/qt-review-checklist.md § Thread
Safety
Scope: Qt naming conventions, const-correctness, move semantics, enum hygiene, noexcept correctness.
Check for:
get-prefix on mere getters (Qt reserves get for user
interaction or out-parameter decomposition)std::forward<T>() on forwarding/universal referencesreturn std::move(localVar) preventing NRVOconst local variable preventing implicit move on return
(e.g. const QJsonDocument doc(...); return doc; forces copy)const method returning mutable pointer through raw pointer
indirection (findById() const returning T* lets callers
mutate via a const accessor — const doesn't propagate through
raw pointers)noexcept on functions containing Q_ASSERT (incompatible —
Q_ASSERT may throw for testing, noexcept terminates)switch over enum with default: label (suppresses -Wswitch)QList<QString> instead of QStringListconst on methods that don't modify stateconst QMetaObject::Connection preventing handle cleanupReferences: references/qt-review-checklist.md § API &
Naming, § Enums, § Methods, § Move Semantics, § Operators
Scope: Missing error checks, input validation, security.
Check for:
QFile::open() return value ignoredQJsonDocument::fromJson() result not checked for
isNull()/isObject() before useQNetworkReply::error() not checked before readAll()hasError() not checked after writinghttp:// instead of https:// in URLsQNetworkAccessManager::sslErrors)setTransferTimeout)QString::arg() with wrong placeholder countsaveToFile() returning true regardless of I/O errorsReferences: references/qt-review-checklist.md § Error
Handling & Validation
Scope: Performance anti-patterns, dead code, unnecessary copies, code smells.
Check for:
QRegularExpression constructed inside a loop (expensive
compilation on every iteration)roleNames() rebuilding QHash on every call (should cache)operator[] on shared QHash (triggers detach) —
use .value() for readsQMap/QHash iteration order nondeterminism when selecting
a "best" or "first" entry (.first() changes if keys are
added; use deterministic tie-breaking)QMap for small fixed-size constant data (use array/switch)References: references/qt-review-checklist.md §
Performance & Code Quality
| Confidence | Meaning | Action |
|---|---|---|
| 90–100 | Certain: direct rule violation with full symbol trace | Report as finding |
| 80–89 | High: rule violation confirmed but edge case possible | Report as finding |
| 60–79 | Medium: likely issue but cannot fully verify | Report as investigation target |
| <60 | Low: suspicion only | Suppress entirely |
Investigation targets are findings the agent believes are real but cannot fully verify — e.g. noexcept correctness requiring whole-program analysis, dead code that may have callers outside scope, or design-intent judgments like virtual access levels. These are presented in a separate section for human verification. Maximum 10 investigation targets per report, prioritized by confidence within the 60–79 band.
Present the final report as follows. Use exactly this structure.
## Qt Code Review Report
**Scope**: [diff: `git diff HEAD~1..HEAD` | files: <paths>]
**Files reviewed**: N
**Issues found**: N (M from lint, K from deep analysis)
---
### Lint findings
For each lint finding:
#### [L-NNN] <Short title>
- **File**: `path/to/file.cpp:42`
- **Rule**: <rule ID from checklist>
- **Finding**: <what the script detected>
- **Mitigation**: <what to do, in prose — no code patches>
---
### Deep analysis findings
For each agent finding:
#### [D-NNN] <Short title>
- **File**: `path/to/file.cpp:42`
- **Category**: <agent name: Model Contracts | Ownership &
Lifecycle | Thread Safety | API & C++ Correctness | Error
Handling | Performance & Quality>
- **Confidence**: NN/100
- **Finding**: <description of the issue>
- **Trace**: <how the issue was confirmed — which symbols were
followed, what was checked>
- **Mitigation**: <what to do, in prose — no code patches>
---
### Investigation targets (human verification needed)
Findings the agent identified but could not fully verify.
Maximum 10, sorted by confidence. These require human judgment.
For each investigation target:
#### [I-NNN] <Short title>
- **File**: `path/to/file.cpp:42`
- **Category**: <agent name>
- **Confidence**: NN/100
- **Finding**: <what the agent suspects>
- **Unverified because**: <what the agent could not confirm —
e.g. "cannot trace all callees for throw potential",
"only one implementation visible in scope">
- **How to verify**: <specific action for the reviewer>
---
### Summary
| Category | Lint | Deep | Investigate | Total |
|----------|------|------|-------------|-------|
| ... | N | N | N | N |
| **Total**| **M**| **K**| **I** | **N** |
Findings below confidence 60 are suppressed entirely.The following reference files contain detailed checklists extracted from the Qt wiki "Things To Look Out For In Reviews":
references/qt-review-checklist.md — Universal Qt6 C++ review
rules (always loaded)references/qt-framework-checklist.md — Qt framework/module
development rules (loaded only in framework mode)references/qt-deprecated-classes.md — Classes and patterns
that should no longer be used in Qt implementationreferences/lint-scripts/qt_review_lint.py — Single-pass
Python linter (runs all 60+ checks in <1s)x-tools-author/x-tools
6214c41
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.