Total 53,839 skills, Code Quality has 2427 skills
Showing 12 of 2427 skills
Set up and maintain hk git hook manager in any repository. Use when adding pre-commit hooks, configuring linters, setting up code quality automation, working with hk.pkl, or maintaining existing hook configurations. Triggers on tasks involving hk, git hooks, pre-commit checks, commit-msg validation, or linting pipelines.
Comprehensive React/TypeScript frontend code review with optional parallel agents
Application performance profiling and bottleneck identification — Node.js profiling, Chrome DevTools, flame graphs, memory leak detection, CPU profiling, React rendering performance. Activate on "profiling", "performance bottleneck", "flame graph", "memory leak", "slow app", "CPU profiling", "heap snapshot", "React re-renders", "EXPLAIN ANALYZE", "event loop lag", "clinic.js", "Core Web Vitals". NOT for infrastructure monitoring or observability (use logging-observability), load testing (use a load-testing skill), or database schema optimization.
Set up Markuplint in a project from scratch. Detects framework, creates config, runs initial lint, and guides the user through rule adoption with Bulk Suppressions support.
Use after run-plan completes to independently verify the implementation. Reads only the plan document and inspects the codebase from scratch — information-isolated from the execution context. Produces a structured review document with PASS/FAIL verdict. Triggers when the user says "review the work", "verify the implementation", "check if the plan was executed correctly".
Read-only drift detector. Diffs SPEC.md against current code and reports violations grouped by severity. Writes nothing — suggests remedies via the spec or build skills but never invokes them. Triggers when the user asks to check drift, audit the spec, verify invariants, or ask whether code still matches the spec. Phrasings: "check drift", "audit the spec", "does the code still match §V", "check invariants", "spec vs code".
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.
Create a detailed refactor plan with tiny commits via user interview, then file it as a GitHub issue. Use when user wants to plan a refactor, create a refactoring RFC, or break a refactor into safe incremental steps.
Identify refactoring opportunities by surfacing architectural friction. Apply the deletion test, deep-modules vocabulary, and seams analysis. Each opportunity becomes its own evanflow-writing-plans cycle. Use when reviewing code for refactoring, when a file has grown too large, or when architecture concerns surface during feature work.
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.
Build a compilable type-level skeleton from a high-level architecture spec before writing any implementation logic. Use when you have an architectural assessment, design doc, or restructuring plan and need to prove the new architecture is sound before migrating code. Also use when asked to "scaffold the new architecture", "create type stubs", "build the shell", "flesh out this spec", "skeleton the modules", or any request to turn architectural intent into verified structure. This skill follows the "Human Builds the Shell" paradigm: types are hard constraints that the compiler enforces, so if the skeleton compiles, the architecture is structurally sound. Especially valuable for large refactors where you don't trust agents to maintain coherence.
Use when the user asks to fix, debug, or make a specific feature/module/area work end-to-end. Triggers: 'make X work', 'fix the Y feature', 'the Z module is broken', 'focus on [area]'. Not for quick single-bug fixes — this is for systematic deep-dive repair across all files and dependencies.