Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →hashgraph-online/code-reviewer
Review completed implementation batches for spec compliance and code quality. Invoke after execution batches complete, before merging, or when a review gate is reached in the workflow.
Passed 15 of 20 test cases with the skill, and 8 of 20 without it.
and 10 more in the full report
9 fixed8 passed either way5 still failing1 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 9 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
We have four review findings for our key store implementation: a complex thread-safety refactor (complex), a critical memory leak fix (blocking), an unclear comment about 'buffer sizing' (unclear), and an unused import removal (simple). In what exact order should these items be addressed?
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| Puts clarification of unclear items first in the resolution sequence. | Passed | Passed |
| Places blocking critical fixes before simple or complex fixes. | Passed | Passed |
| Schedules simple import issues before complex refactoring. | Missed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
Two responsibilities: requesting review (dispatching a reviewer subagent) and receiving review (acting on feedback with technical rigor). Review early, review often. Verify before implementing feedback.
Mandatory after: each task in SDD, each planned execution wave, each major feature, before merge. Optional: when stuck, before refactoring, after fixing complex bugs.
BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1) and HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)general-purpose subagent using template at skills/code-reviewer/code-reviewer-prompt.md[DESCRIPTION] (what was built), [PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS] (contract/spec reference), [BASE_SHA], [HEAD_SHA], [WAVE_ID], and a distinct [REVIEW_REPORT_FILE].[REVIEW_REPORT_FILE], then record that exact path in the wave receipt: ssf execution review <change-dir> --wave <id> --base <sha> --head <sha> --report <review-report-path> --verdict <pass|fail>.fail receipt, focused repair, re-review, and replacement pass receipt before a dependent wave or closing can proceed. Note Minor for later, push back with reasoning if reviewer is wrong.For unrequested complexity, cite the missing task requirement and diff line. Use Important for merge-blocking complexity and Minor for safe, behavior-neutral redundancy; never score by line count.
| Level | Meaning | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Critical | Bugs, security, data loss, broken functionality | Fix immediately |
| Important | Architecture problems, missing features, poor error handling, test gaps | Fix before next batch |
| Minor | Code style, optimization, documentation polish | Note for later |
test cases passed, vs 8 / 20 without
Published skills whose descriptions closely match this one, with their headline benchmark lift.
More skills from the same source and nearby in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.