Skip to content
Back to skills

Code Review 30

ASecurity

Comprehensive multi-agent code review with parallel analysis. Use for thorough code reviews, finding bugs, checking regressions, or getting alternative implementation perspectives.

  • 2 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 0 views
  • Added September 27, 2026
ai-agentsbashcode-reviewgitapidocumentation

Works with

  • api

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 27, 2026

npx -y skills add David-Li0406/meta-skill-evloving --skill code-review-30 --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Code Review 30?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Code Review 30
[![Security: A β€” Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/david-li0406-code-review-30/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/david-li0406-code-review-30)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: code-review
description: Comprehensive multi-agent code review with parallel analysis. Use for thorough code reviews, finding bugs, checking regressions, or getting alternative implementation perspectives.
context: fork
---

# Agent Code Review

> Orchestrate parallel sub-agent reviews for comprehensive code analysis and actionable feedback.

## When to Use

- Deep code review before merge
- Bug hunting and regression detection  
- Getting alternative implementation perspectives
- Validating library/API usage correctness

## Instructions

### Step 1: Determine Review Scope

Identify what to review:

```bash
# Option A: Recent changes
git diff HEAD~1

# Option B: Staged changes  
git diff --staged

# Option C: Specific commit range
git log --oneline -10  # then select range

# Option D: Current working state
git status
```

### Step 2: Spawn Review Sub-Agents

Deploy parallel sub-agents with focused tasks:

| Sub-Agent | Task |
|-----------|------|
| **Spec Reviewer** | Check implementation against `UPP-1.3.spec.md` and compliance requirements |
| **Standards Reviewer** | Compare against existing provider patterns and org coding standards |
| **Bug Hunter** | Search for regressions, edge cases, error handling gaps |
| **API Validator** | Web search to verify API/library usage correctness |

**Prompt each sub-agent with:**
> "Perform a comprehensive code review of [scope]. Investigate spec compliance, coding standards consistency, and validate any API/library usage against current documentation. Report findings as actionable items."

### Step 3: Collect and Synthesize

Aggregate sub-agent reports into:

1. **Critical issues** requiring immediate fix
2. **Recommendations** for improvement
3. **Alternative approaches** worth considering
4. **Regression risks** with resolution plans

## Output Format

```markdown
# Code Review Report

## Files Reviewed
- `path/to/file1.ts`
- `path/to/file2.ts`

## Critical Issues πŸ”΄
| File | Line | Issue | Fix |
|------|------|-------|-----|

## Recommendations 🟑
| File | Line | Suggestion | Rationale |
|------|------|------------|-----------|

## Alternative Perspectives πŸ”΅
[Alternative implementation approaches from sub-agents]

## Regression Analysis
| Risk | Affected Area | Resolution Plan |
|------|---------------|-----------------|

## Action Items
- [ ] Fix: [critical item]
- [ ] Consider: [recommendation]
- [ ] Verify: [needs validation]
```

## Notes

- Sub-agents should search the codebase for similar patterns before suggesting changes
- Always create resolution plans for identified regressions
- Validate external dependencies against their official documentation

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…