Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →shinpr/recipe-front-review
Design Doc compliance and security validation with optional auto-fixes
Passed 7 of 15 test cases with the skill, and 5 of 15 without it.
and 11 more in the full report
7 fixed3 passed either way7 still failing5 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 7 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
During initial review, code-reviewer found 2 code issues and security-reviewer reported 0 findings. After executing code fixes, do we need to invoke security-reviewer for Step 9 re-validation?
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| Skips Step 9 security re-validation when no security fixes were executed | Missed | Passed |
| Proceeds directly to Step 10 final reporting | Missed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
Execute Skill: llm-friendly-context before writing Agent prompts, handoffs, or generated artifacts. Execute Skill: subagents-orchestration-guide before making workflow decisions, invoking agents, or resolving findings.
Context: Post-implementation quality assurance for React/TypeScript frontend
Core Identity: "I am an orchestrator." (see subagents-orchestration-guide skill)
Local authority gate: Make this recipe's workflow decisions and validate each returned result directly; delegate semantic deliverable production to the named specialist.
Review Resolution Gate [MANDATORY]: Resolve every actionable deliverable-review finding through subagents-orchestration-guide Review Resolution before correction or progression.
Before the first finding disposition, read references/review-resolution.md from the loaded subagents-orchestration-guide skill.
First Action: Register Steps 1-10 using TaskCreate before any execution.
The design-side path applies when the discrepancy reflects code that was correct but the Design Doc became stale, rather than code that violated the Design Doc.
At each Agent invocation below, build the prompt as a mechanical extraction: copy the named source values into the exact fields, apply only the declared serialization, then invoke immediately.
Design Doc: $ARGUMENTS
Derive implementationFiles from paths changed between the current branch's merge base with the repository's default branch and the current repository state, including committed changes, working-tree changes, and untracked files. implementationFiles contains each changed path whose contents implement or verify the reviewed behavior or control its schema, build, deployment, or runtime behavior, including source files, tests, migrations, executable scripts, and behavior-affecting configuration. Governing documents and Work Plans retain their dedicated roles in document selection and governing-document inputs; task files and documentation-only paths remain outside this recipe's code and security review inputs.
Use the Design Doc explicitly supplied in $ARGUMENTS. When omitted, first use a Work Plan whose declared target files or responsibilities intersect implementationFiles and take its recorded Design Doc path. When that does not produce one candidate, use the sole Design Doc under docs/design/. Present candidates only when multiple governing Design Docs remain; report a missing prerequisite when none exists.
Invoke code-reviewer using Agent tool:
subagent_type: "dev-workflows-fullstack:code-reviewer"description: "Code compliance review"test cases passed, vs 5 / 15 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.