Agent-Skills.md

Agent Skills: code-review

Systematic code review checklist for quality and security

UncategorizedID: 48Nauts-Operator/opencode-baseline/code-review

Repository

48Nauts-Operator/opencode-baseline
48Nauts-Operator
3

Install this agent skill to your local

pnpm dlx add-skill https://github.com/48Nauts-Operator/opencode-baseline/tree/HEAD/.opencode/skill/code-review

Skill Files

Browse the full folder contents for code-review.

Download Skill

Loading file tree…

.opencode/skill/code-review/SKILL.md

Skill Metadata

Name
code-review
Description
Systematic code review checklist for quality and security

What I Do

  • Provide systematic review checklist
  • Identify security, performance, and maintainability issues
  • Ensure consistent review quality
  • Focus on what matters most

When to Use Me

Use this skill when:

  • Reviewing pull requests
  • Self-reviewing before submitting
  • Auditing existing code
  • Onboarding to a new codebase

Review Checklist

1. Correctness

  • [ ] Does the code do what it's supposed to do?
  • [ ] Are edge cases handled?
  • [ ] Are error conditions handled gracefully?
  • [ ] Are there any obvious bugs?

2. Security

  • [ ] Input validation present?
  • [ ] No SQL injection vulnerabilities?
  • [ ] No XSS vulnerabilities?
  • [ ] Sensitive data not logged or exposed?
  • [ ] Authentication/authorization correct?
  • [ ] No hardcoded secrets?

3. Performance

  • [ ] No N+1 queries?
  • [ ] Appropriate caching?
  • [ ] No unnecessary loops or iterations?
  • [ ] Large data sets paginated?
  • [ ] Async operations where appropriate?

4. Maintainability

  • [ ] Code is readable and self-documenting?
  • [ ] Functions are small and focused?
  • [ ] No code duplication?
  • [ ] Naming is clear and consistent?
  • [ ] Comments explain WHY, not WHAT?

5. Testing

  • [ ] Tests exist for new functionality?
  • [ ] Edge cases tested?
  • [ ] Tests are readable and maintainable?
  • [ ] No flaky tests?

6. Architecture

  • [ ] Follows existing patterns?
  • [ ] Appropriate separation of concerns?
  • [ ] Dependencies are reasonable?
  • [ ] No circular dependencies?

Review Feedback Format

For issues:

[SEVERITY] File:Line - Description

Problem: What's wrong
Impact: Why it matters  
Suggestion: How to fix

Severity levels:

  • [BLOCKER] - Must fix before merge
  • [MAJOR] - Should fix, significant issue
  • [MINOR] - Nice to fix, small improvement
  • [NIT] - Optional, style preference

Good Review Practices

  1. Be constructive - Suggest solutions, not just problems
  2. Be specific - Point to exact lines
  3. Be kind - Review the code, not the person
  4. Be thorough - Don't just skim
  5. Be timely - Review within 24 hours

Self-Review Checklist

Before submitting a PR, verify:

  • [ ] I've reviewed my own diff
  • [ ] Tests pass locally
  • [ ] No debug code left in
  • [ ] No commented-out code
  • [ ] Commit messages are clear
  • [ ] PR description explains the change