Total 43,803 skills, Code Quality has 2051 skills
Showing 12 of 2051 skills
Review .NET (C#/F#) code for language and runtime conventions: async/await, nullable, API versioning, IDisposable, LINQ, and testability. Language-only atomic skill; output is a findings list.
Analyze code examples in SKILL.md files for correctness using static analysis and TypeScript compilation
Comprehensive coding standards and best practices for maintainable, consistent software development across multiple languages and paradigms
Refactor codebases using Design by Typed Holes methodology - iterative, test-driven refactoring with formal hole resolution, constraint propagation, and continuous validation. Use when refactoring existing code, optimizing architecture, or consolidating technical debt through systematic hole-driven development.
Before declaring work complete, checks for loose ends: unused imports, TODO comments created, missing tests, stale references, incomplete error handling. Activates after implementing features or fixes. The cleanup that always gets skipped.
Apply systematic performance optimization techniques when writing or reviewing code. Use when optimizing hot paths, reducing latency, improving throughput, fixing performance regressions, or when the user mentions performance, optimization, speed, latency, throughput, profiling, or benchmarking.
Review code for quality, correctness, and best practices. Use when the user wants a code review or feedback on their implementation.
Meta-skill for validating the integrity and quality of other skills. automatically checks for SKILL.md existence, script syntax errors (via Godot CLI), and metadata completeness. Use this skill to verify the entire skill library. Trigger keywords: validation, continuous_integration, quality_assurance, syntax_check, metadata_check.
[Fix & Debug] Investigate and explain how existing features or logic work. READ-ONLY exploration with no code changes.
[Fix & Debug] ⚡⚡ Fix a GitHub issue with systematic debugging
Challenges decisions, plans, and code by systematically arguing the opposing side. Surfaces risks, pokes holes in assumptions, and stress-tests thinking before committing. Supports intensity levels (gentle, balanced, ruthless, linus) and works with conversation context or a specific file reference. Trigger on requests like "challenge this", "poke holes", "what could go wrong", "play devil's advocate", "linus mode", or "/devils-advocate".
Reviews code changes for correctness, maintainability, security, and adherence to project conventions. Use when reviewing PRs, auditing recent changes, or getting a second opinion on implementation quality.