review-code

Original：🇺🇸 English

Translated

Run a read-only, fresh-context branch-diff code review and report findings. Use when running /review-code, before finishing issue work, or when a local review gate should inspect committed, staged, unstaged, and untracked changes without mutating code or GitHub state.

3installs

Sourcepatinaproject/skills

Added on2026-05-22

NPX Install

npx skill4agent add patinaproject/skills review-code

SKILL.md Content

View Translation Comparison →

Review Code

This skill is portable. It works from instructions alone and should be usable in any repository with Git history and repository guidance.

Safety Boundary

Local code review is read-only and findings-only.

Do not edit files, stage changes, commit, push, create pull requests, post GitHub comments, or mutate review threads.
Do not run formatters, generators, fixers, installers, or other commands that write to the worktree.
Do not read, require, print, or infer secrets.
Do not fall back to same-thread review. If fresh reviewer dispatch is unavailable, halt.

Scope

Resolve the repository default branch with
```
gh repo view --json defaultBranchRef --jq .defaultBranchRef.name
```
or
```
git rev-parse --abbrev-ref origin/HEAD
```
. Normalize the fallback by stripping the leading
```
origin/
```
so the branch name is
```
main
```
, not
```
origin/main
```
. If neither source can identify a default branch, halt with instructions to set
```
origin/HEAD
```
outside this skill, for example with
```
git remote set-head origin --auto
```
.
Use the current
```
origin/<default-branch>
```
ref. Do not update refs during review. Verify the local ref exists with
```
git rev-parse --verify origin/<default-branch>
```
. When
```
gh
```
is available, resolve
```
{owner}/{repo}
```
with
```
gh repo view --json nameWithOwner --jq .nameWithOwner
```
, then compare the local SHA to the remote default-branch SHA from
```
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/branches/{branch} --jq .commit.sha
```
; halt and report both SHAs when they differ. When remote freshness cannot be checked, continue only after recording that freshness is unverified in the report.
Compute the review base with
```
git merge-base origin/<default-branch> HEAD
```
after normalization.
Review the default-branch merge-base to the current branch, plus staged, unstaged, and untracked local changes. Include deleted files.
Load repository instructions before review:
```
AGENTS.md
```
,
```
CLAUDE.md
```
if present, and docs they explicitly import.
Treat generated files, lockfiles, vendored files, and dogfood overlay paths as low-signal unless repository instructions or the diff make them relevant.

Fresh Reviewer Dispatch

The primary agent may compute scope and collect context, but the actual review must run as a fresh-context reviewer in a fresh reviewer agent or equivalent isolated dispatch surface with no inherited implementation conversation. Prefer a host-provided read-only Explorer or reviewer background agent when one is available, because branch-diff review is a codebase question with a bounded scope.

In Codex, spawn a fresh Explorer background agent for the review without asking for another user confirmation when the caller has already requested local review,

/review-code

, or an issue workflow that reaches the review gate. Close the Explorer or reviewer agent after its final report is consumed. Do not let old review agents pile up, and do not start a duplicate reviewer for the same unresolved review pass.

Pass only:

Repository path
Default branch, merge-base, head, and dirty/untracked scope
Changed file list and relevant diff commands
Repository instructions
This read-only review contract

If the host runtime cannot create a fresh reviewer or equivalent isolated review surface, halt and report that isolation is unavailable. Do not ask the current implementation conversation to perform the review.

Reviewer Contract

The reviewer should inspect the scoped diff for merge-relevant risk:

correctness, security, data loss, requirements fit, error handling, test quality, edge cases, production readiness, clarity, and maintainability
missing or misleading tests for changed behavior
inconsistencies with repository instructions or issue acceptance criteria

Group findings by severity: blocking, non-blocking, and low-severity. Each finding must include a file and line reference, rationale, and suggested fix. Keep praise-heavy commentary out of the report. If there are no findings, say so and mention residual risk or test gaps.

Distinction From Hosted Review

review-code

is a local isolated reviewer for branch-diff findings. It does not emulate

code-review.yml

, does not require a PR number, and does not post comments.

This skill only covers local isolated branch-diff review. Hosted review workflows own their own prompt, permissions, and PR-commenting contract.

Report

Base, head, and default branch used
Local default-branch ref freshness check, or why freshness is unverified (for example:
```
Freshness unverified: gh unavailable; reviewed current origin/main only
```
)
Changed files, including staged, unstaged, and untracked files
Fresh reviewer dispatch mechanism, or halt reason
Findings grouped by severity
Low-signal paths skipped or reviewed with rationale