Agent-Skills.md

Agent Skills: Code Review Guidelines

Provides structured code review guidelines for TypeScript projects. Use when reviewing pull requests, analyzing code quality, or suggesting improvements.

UncategorizedID: mastra-ai/mastra/code-review

Repository

mastra-ai/mastra
mastra-aiLicense: NOASSERTION
22,3231,790

Install this agent skill to your local

pnpm dlx add-skill https://github.com/mastra-ai/mastra/tree/HEAD/examples/unified-workspace/skills/code-review

Skill Files

Browse the full folder contents for code-review.

Download Skill

Loading file tree…

examples/unified-workspace/skills/code-review/SKILL.md

Skill Metadata

Name
code-review
Description
Provides structured code review guidelines for TypeScript projects. Use when reviewing pull requests, analyzing code quality, or suggesting improvements.

Code Review Guidelines

Overview

This skill provides structured guidelines for reviewing TypeScript code. Apply these standards when reviewing pull requests, analyzing code quality, or suggesting improvements.

Keywords: code review, pull request, PR review, TypeScript, code quality, best practices, refactoring

Review Checklist

1. Code Correctness

Before approving, verify:

  • [ ] Logic is correct and handles edge cases
  • [ ] Error handling is appropriate
  • [ ] No obvious bugs or race conditions
  • [ ] Tests cover the changes adequately

2. Code Quality

Check for:

  • [ ] Clear, descriptive variable and function names
  • [ ] Functions do one thing well (single responsibility)
  • [ ] No excessive nesting (max 3 levels)
  • [ ] DRY - no unnecessary duplication
  • [ ] YAGNI - no speculative features

3. TypeScript Specific

Ensure:

  • [ ] Proper type annotations (avoid any)
  • [ ] Interfaces/types defined for complex objects
  • [ ] Generics used appropriately
  • [ ] Null/undefined handled safely
  • [ ] strict mode compatible

4. Performance

Look for:

  • [ ] Unnecessary re-renders (React)
  • [ ] Missing memoization for expensive operations
  • [ ] Inefficient loops or data structures
  • [ ] Memory leaks (event listeners, subscriptions)

Review Comments

Comment Format

Use this format for review comments:

[severity]: brief description

Why: explanation of the issue
Suggestion: how to fix it (with code if helpful)

Severity levels:

  • [critical] - Must fix before merge
  • [suggestion] - Recommended improvement
  • [nit] - Minor style preference
  • [question] - Need clarification

Example Comments

Good comment:

[suggestion]: Consider extracting this validation logic

Why: This 15-line validation block is hard to test in isolation
Suggestion: Move to a `validateUserInput(data)` function

Bad comment:

This is wrong, fix it.

Common Issues

Anti-patterns to Flag

  1. God functions - Functions over 50 lines doing multiple things
  2. Prop drilling - Passing props through 3+ component levels
  3. Magic numbers - Unexplained literal values
  4. Catch-all error handling - catch(e) { console.log(e) }
  5. Implicit any - Missing type annotations on function parameters

Security Concerns

Always flag:

  • SQL/NoSQL injection vulnerabilities
  • XSS opportunities (unsanitized user input in DOM)
  • Hardcoded secrets or API keys
  • Insecure randomness for security contexts
  • Missing input validation on API endpoints

Approval Guidelines

Approve When

  • All critical issues resolved
  • Tests pass
  • Code meets team standards
  • No security concerns

Request Changes When

  • Critical bugs found
  • Security vulnerabilities present
  • Missing required tests
  • Significant performance issues

Leave Comments When

  • Minor improvements possible
  • Design alternatives worth discussing
  • Documentation could be clearer