Total 50,510 skills, Code Quality has 2287 skills
Showing 12 of 2287 skills
Analyzes code comments for accuracy, completeness, and long-term maintainability. Identifies misleading comments, comment rot, and documentation gaps. Triggers: After adding documentation, before finalizing a PR, when reviewing comments. Examples: - "Check if the comments are accurate" -> verifies comments match code behavior - "Review the documentation I added" -> analyzes new comments for quality - "Analyze comments for technical debt" -> finds outdated or misleading comments - "Are my docstrings correct?" -> validates documentation accuracy
Phase 2 of the issue process — Read the issue report + read the code, identify the true root cause and assess the repair risk, and finally provide the user with 2-3 repair plan options for them to decide. This phase is **not about starting to modify code** — after analysis, show the conclusion to the user first, and only proceed to Phase 3 after the user confirms the plan. The prerequisite dependency easysdd-issue-report has been completed. Trigger scenarios: The user says "analyze this bug", "find the root cause", "locate the issue", and the {slug}-report.md already exists in the issue directory.
SonarCloud integration. Manage Projects. Use when the user wants to interact with SonarCloud data.
Run a formal, multi-dimensional code review of a pull request. Reads the PR diff, classifies change types, dispatches parallel reviewers by dimension (correctness, consistency, docs-sync, plus conditional security/edge-cases/UX/performance/structure/maintainability), and synthesizes findings into an actionable punch list. Use when the user asks to review a PR, run /deep-review, mark a PR as ready for review, or requests a formal/thorough code review.
Architecture audit that maps module dependencies, checks layering integrity, and flags structural decay across a codebase, drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user asks to audit architecture, review folder/module structure, check for circular imports, understand how the codebase is organized, or asks "does this follow clean architecture?", "why does everything depend on everything?", "are our layers correct?", "where should this code live?". Also triggers for onboarding requests: "explain this codebase to a new developer" or "give me a codebase tour" (use onboarding mode). Also triggers when user mentions: dependency inversion / hexagonal architecture / bounded contexts / circular imports / tangled dependencies / module coupling / package structure / spaghetti code / directory layout. Use this skill proactively when project structure, module boundaries, or architectural decisions are discussed — even without the word "audit". Do NOT trigger for: PR-level code review (use brooks-review) or line-level refactoring questions — this skill analyzes structural/module-level concerns, not individual functions.
Audits code for design pattern opportunities and anti-patterns — identifies places where a specific GoF or architectural pattern would solve an observable problem, and flags misapplied patterns that add complexity without benefit. Generates fix prompts. Trigger phrases: "design patterns", "pattern check", "pattern review", "refactoring patterns", "pattern analysis".
Detects framework-specific anti-patterns, convention violations, and idiom misuse across PHP/Laravel, React/Next.js, and Python/Django/FastAPI codebases. Loads framework-specific reference guides and checks against framework conventions. Generates severity-scored findings with copy-pasteable fix prompts. Trigger phrases: "framework review", "framework check", "laravel best practices", "react best practices", "framework audit", "framework-specific review".
Review Go implementations against spec acceptance tests. References go-conventions and agent-conduct.
Iterative self-review loop after implementing a plan. Re-read changed code with fresh eyes, fix issues found, re-run quality checks, repeat until clean. For UI work, includes visual verification (view the rendered page). Use after evanflow-executing-plans completes; on success, report and stop — the user decides what's next.
Implement a GitHub issue end-to-end using TDD, following the Agent Brief contract. Use when user wants the agent to pick up a ticket, write code to fulfill its acceptance criteria, commit, push, and close the issue.
Fix Python code formatting issues using the Ruff formatter. Use when: (1) Formatting errors are detected by ruff format --check, (2) Python files need to be formatted to match project style, (3) Pre-commit hooks or CI fail due to formatting issues.
Workflow-first code review for bugs, regressions, risky behavior changes, and missing tests. USE when reviewing diffs, PRs, or proposed implementations.