Review .NET changes for bugs, regressions, architectural drift, missing tests, incorrect async or disposal behavior, and platform-specific pitfalls before you approve or merge them. USE FOR: reviewing a pull request or patch in a .NET repository; checking for behavioral regressions, API misuse, or missing tests; auditing architectural or framework-specific. DO NOT USE FOR: unrelated stacks; generic tasks that do not need this specific guidance. INVOKES: inspect the repository context, edit targe
SkillScore95Maintained
Automatic
◆Coding pack
Last verified 8/19/2026
What it changes
Passed 21 of 22 test cases with the skill, and 20 of 22 without it.
Without skill91%
With skill95%
Checks it passed that the model alone missed
Lists findings before giving the high-level summary.
1 fixed20 passed either way1 still failing0 broke
Pass-rate lift
+5 pp
Tokens
+26%
Agent turns
0%
Response time
+5%
Model gemini-3.6-flashMeasured 8/19/2026v121 of 22 cases passed with skill
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
See it in action
A test case the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
Prompt
Review this C# PR diff that changes `OrderProcessor.cs` to use synchronous IO inside an async loop. Provide your complete review evaluation.
What was checked, without and with the skill
Checked
Without skill
With skill
Lists findings before giving the high-level summary.
Missed
Passed
case-16 · gemini-3.6-flash · 8/19/2026 · answers are capped and redacted
What's inside
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
SKILL.md55 lines3 files
.NET Code Review
Trigger On
reviewing a pull request or patch in a .NET repository
checking for behavioral regressions, API misuse, or missing tests
auditing architectural or framework-specific correctness
References
checklist.md - comprehensive code review checklist organized by risk priority
patterns.md - common patterns and anti-patterns for async, disposal, and security
Workflow
Prioritize correctness, data loss, concurrency, security, lifecycle, and platform-compatibility issues before style concerns. Use the checklist P0-P2 categories first.
Check async flows, cancellation propagation, exception handling, disposal, and transient versus singleton lifetime mistakes. Refer to patterns.md for common pitfalls.
Verify tests cover the changed behavior, not only the happy path or refactored implementation details.
Inspect framework-specific boundaries such as EF query translation, ASP.NET middleware order, Blazor render state, or MAUI UI-thread access.
Call out missing observability, migration risk, or runtime configuration drift when those are part of the change.
Keep findings concrete, reproducible, and tied to specific files or behavior.
Key Review Patterns
Async Code
Async must propagate through the entire call chain; never use .Result, .Wait(), or .GetAwaiter().GetResult() in async contexts
Always propagate CancellationToken parameters
Use ConfigureAwait(false) in library code
Never use async void except for event handlers
Resource Disposal
Use using declarations or statements for all IDisposable resources
Use await using for IAsyncDisposable resources
Use IHttpClientFactory instead of creating HttpClient directly
Unsubscribe event handlers to prevent memory leaks
Validate DI service lifetimes to prevent captured dependencies
Security
Use parameterized queries or EF to prevent SQL injection
Project-wide code coverage and CRAP (Change Risk Anti-Patterns) score analysis for .NET projects. Calculates CRAP scores per method and surfaces risk hotspots — complex code with low coverage that is dangerous to modify. Use to diagnose why coverage is stuck or plateaued, identify what methods block improvement, or get project-wide coverage analysis with risk ranking. USE FOR: coverage stuck, coverage plateau, can't increase coverage, what's blocking coverage, coverage gap, CRAP scores, risk hot