Agent Skills: Code Reviewer

High-signal code review workflow for pull requests and patches: correctness, readability, API/UX, performance, security, and maintainability. Use when reviewing diffs/PRs, writing review comments, proposing fixes, or producing a structured review report with actionable follow-ups.

UncategorizedID: vadimcomanescu/codex-skills/code-reviewer

Install this agent skill to your local

pnpm dlx add-skill https://github.com/vadimcomanescu/codex-skills/tree/HEAD/skills/.curated/quality/code-reviewer

Skill Files

Browse the full folder contents for code-reviewer.

Download Skill

Loading file tree…

skills/.curated/quality/code-reviewer/SKILL.md

Skill Metadata

Name
code-reviewer
Description
"High-signal code review workflow for pull requests and patches: correctness, readability, API/UX, performance, security, and maintainability. Use when reviewing diffs/PRs, writing review comments, proposing fixes, or producing a structured review report with actionable follow-ups."

Code Reviewer

Give reviews that help the author ship safely and quickly.

Quick Start

  1. Understand intent: what’s the user-facing / system-facing change and why?
  2. Review in this order:
    • Correctness (edge cases, invariants, error handling)
    • Safety (security + data handling + secrets)
    • Maintainability (structure, naming, interfaces)
    • Performance (hot paths, I/O, allocations, DB queries)
    • Tests (do they fail before the fix? do they cover the right behavior?)
  3. Leave comments that are:
    • Actionable (what to change) + why (risk/benefit) + scope (must vs nice-to-have)

Large diff triage (use when the change is big)

  • Start with the entrypoints and high-risk files (auth, payments, data writes).
  • Identify invariants the change must preserve, then hunt for violations.
  • Skim for mechanical changes and collapse them; focus deep review on behavioral deltas.

When to request changes

  • Bugs or correctness issues that can ship user-impacting failures.
  • Security/privacy regressions or data handling gaps.
  • Missing or inadequate tests for new behavior or fixed bugs.

Output format (recommended)

  • Summary: what the change does
  • Major issues: must-fix items (blockers)
  • Minor suggestions: improvements / nits
  • Test plan: how to validate locally/CI
  • Follow-ups: tickets/cleanup that shouldn’t block merge

Optional tool: generate a review report from git diff

From the repo you’re reviewing:

python ~/.codex/skills/code-reviewer/scripts/review_diff.py --base origin/main --out /tmp/review.md

References

  • Review checklist and comment style: references/review-checklist.md