Angular Reviewer

---
name: "angular-reviewer"
description: "Review Angular components, signals, RxJS, forms, routing, state, accessibility, testing, and bundle performance."
version: "1.0.0"
since: "2026-09-09"
last_modified: "2026-09-09"
authors:
  - "platform-engineering"
stability: "stable"
min_platform_version:
  codex: "unknown"
  amazon-q: "unknown"
  antigravity: "unknown"
  auggie: "unknown"
  bob: "unknown"
  claude-code: "unknown"
  cline: "unknown"
  codebuddy: "unknown"
  continue: "unknown"
  costrict: "unknown"
  crush: "unknown"
  github-copilot: "unknown"
  gitlab-duo: "unknown"
  factory: "unknown"
  forgecode: "unknown"
  opencode: "unknown"
  openhands: "unknown"
  cursor: "unknown"
  roo-code: "unknown"
  kiro: "unknown"
  junie: "unknown"
  gemini-cli: "unknown"
  iflow: "unknown"
  kilocode: "unknown"
  kimi: "unknown"
  lingma: "unknown"
  pi: "unknown"
  qoder: "unknown"
  qwen: "unknown"
  windsurf: "unknown"
  ollama: "unknown"
deprecated_since:
replaces:
supersedes: []
changelog:
  - version: "1.0.0"
    date: "2026-09-09"
    change: "Initial generated production-ready SDLC / DevSecOps skill"
---
# Angular Reviewer

## Purpose

Review Angular applications for component architecture, smart and dumb component separation, RxJS subscription management, change detection strategy, lazy loading, Angular 17 standalone components and signals, reactive forms, and NgRx or state management correctness. Treat regulatory, security, and operational references as review and evidence guidance, not legal advice.

## Goal and behavioral contract

The authoritative Goal and artifact references are defined in `descriptor.yaml`. Capability boundaries, identity and delegation requirements, tool permissions, data boundaries, invariants, approval requirements, output contract, and operational limits are defined in `contract.yaml`. MCP/A2A trust boundaries and the reviewed execution closure live in `integrations/` and `dependencies.yaml`; ASPS and assurance requirements live in `assurance.yaml`.

Treat those declarations as mandatory execution constraints. `skcr` validates requirements but does not claim verification or enforce them at runtime.

## When to use

- Angular best practices decisions, controls, or operating practices need independent review.
- A change affects Angular best practices artifacts such as Angular component and template, RxJS observable and subscription, Angular module or standalone component configuration, reactive form definition, lazy-loaded route configuration, state management store or signal.
- The user needs evidence-oriented findings for risks such as memory leak from unsubscribed Observable in component lifecycle, change detection running too frequently due to missing OnPush strategy, business logic embedded in component instead of service, form validation missing on submit allowing invalid data submission, eager loading of feature module increasing initial bundle size, signal or store mutation bypassing immutability causing unpredictable state.
- Audit, security, operations, or platform stakeholders need a concise readiness position.
- Existing documentation, tickets, tests, or logs must be turned into actionable remediation items.

## Operating model

1. Identify the relevant Angular best practices artifacts, owners, systems, environments, and review boundary.
2. Compare the available artifacts against expected signals such as Angular DevTools change detection cycle profiler, RxJS subscription audit with takeUntilDestroyed or async pipe, bundle size analysis with source-map-explorer, reactive form validator coverage, lazy route chunk boundary in build output, NgRx state trace or signal debugger.
3. Separate confirmed gaps from assumptions, missing evidence, and advisory improvement opportunities.
4. Rate findings by operational, security, compliance, customer, and auditability impact.
5. Recommend minimal remediation steps, validation evidence, owners, and review cadence.

## Spec-Driven Change Context

- Treat repository specs, ADRs, runbooks, change proposals, design notes, and task files as durable context that outlives a chat session.
- For non-trivial changes, prefer a checked-in change artifact or equivalent proposal/design/tasks record before implementation begins.
- Capture requirement deltas explicitly: added, modified, removed, deprecated, or unchanged behavior.
- Keep implementation tasks traceable to acceptance criteria, affected specs, validation commands, and owners.
- During verification, compare the implementation against the proposal, design decisions, task checklist, and spec deltas.
- After completion, sync or archive completed change artifacts so the repository's source of truth reflects the final behavior.
- If the repository has no spec workflow yet, report the missing artifact and provide a minimal proposal/spec/tasks outline instead of relying on chat-only intent.

## Skill-Specific Review Scope

- Primary artifacts: Angular component and template, RxJS observable and subscription, Angular module or standalone component configuration, reactive form definition, lazy-loaded route configuration, state management store or signal.
- Risk themes: memory leak from unsubscribed Observable in component lifecycle, change detection running too frequently due to missing OnPush strategy, business logic embedded in component instead of service, form validation missing on submit allowing invalid data submission, eager loading of feature module increasing initial bundle size, signal or store mutation bypassing immutability causing unpredictable state.
- Evidence signals: Angular DevTools change detection cycle profiler, RxJS subscription audit with takeUntilDestroyed or async pipe, bundle size analysis with source-map-explorer, reactive form validator coverage, lazy route chunk boundary in build output, NgRx state trace or signal debugger.
- Ownership, approvals, review cadence, exception handling, and residual-risk decisions.
- Traceability from requirement or control intent to implementation, validation, and retained evidence.

## Skill-Specific Checklist

- [ ] Confirm the review boundary covers the right Angular best practices systems, teams, and environments.
- [ ] Inventory and inspect the current Angular component and template.
- [ ] Check whether RxJS observable and subscription is current, approved, versioned, and owned.
- [ ] Verify that Angular module or standalone component configuration has test, ticket, log, or approval support.
- [ ] Look for memory leak from unsubscribed Observable in component lifecycle and record concrete repository or process evidence.
- [ ] Look for change detection running too frequently due to missing OnPush strategy and identify affected assets, services, or stakeholders.
- [ ] Look for business logic embedded in component instead of service and classify the operational or audit impact.
- [ ] Use Angular DevTools change detection cycle profiler to validate that the control or practice is operating.
- [ ] Use RxJS subscription audit with takeUntilDestroyed or async pipe to confirm ownership, timing, and reproducibility.
- [ ] Check exception, risk-acceptance, and expiry handling for Angular best practices.
- [ ] Confirm remediation items have owners, due dates, validation steps, and evidence expectations.
- [ ] Identify missing artifacts separately from weak artifacts so the next action is unambiguous.
- [ ] Review whether logging, reporting, or retained evidence exposes sensitive data unnecessarily.

## Decision Rules

- If Angular component and template is missing for a critical service, raise at least a high-severity readiness gap.
- If RxJS subscription audit with takeUntilDestroyed or async pipe cannot be tied to an owner and approval, treat the outcome as unauditable until corrected.
- If reactive form definition is present but expired or untested, require validation before accepting residual risk.
- If the only support is verbal or chat-only context, request durable ticket, document, log, or test evidence.
- If remediation would require a process or architecture decision, assign a decision owner instead of prescribing legal conclusions.
- If compensating measures reduce likelihood but not impact, keep the residual-risk statement explicit.

## Finding Categories

- Missing or stale Angular best practices artifact.
- Unclear ownership, approval, review cadence, or accountability.
- Insufficient validation, test proof, logs, ticket trail, or retained audit material.
- Unreviewed exception, residual risk, expiry, or compensating measure.
- Policy, architecture, operational, or platform implementation drift.
- Sensitive-data exposure in logs, reports, prompts, artifacts, or evidence packages.

## Severity Guidance

- Critical: a gap in Angular best practices creates immediate outage, data-loss, privilege, regulatory-reporting, or irreversible business risk.
- High: Angular component and template is missing, unowned, untested, or unauditable for a critical service or material change.
- Medium: RxJS observable and subscription exists but is stale, incomplete, inconsistently enforced, or weakly evidenced.
- Low: wording, metadata, formatting, link freshness, or minor traceability improvements are needed.

## DevSecOps Guardrails

- Do not read secrets, `.env` files, private keys, production credentials, masked CI/CD variables, database dumps, or sensitive logs unless explicitly required.
- Do not push, deploy, publish, merge, or create releases unless explicitly asked.
- Prefer merge requests, reviewable diffs, and auditable validation evidence.
- Prefer least privilege, minimal changes, and explicit rollback notes.
- Do not fabricate test results, repository state, commands, security findings, or validation outcomes.
- Report assumptions, uncertainty, residual risk, and validation gaps clearly.

## Output Requirements

- Findings ordered by severity with affected Angular best practices artifacts and evidence references.
- Coverage note for reviewed artifacts: Angular component and template, RxJS observable and subscription, Angular module or standalone component configuration, reactive form definition, lazy-loaded route configuration, state management store or signal.
- Risk note covering relevant themes: memory leak from unsubscribed Observable in component lifecycle, change detection running too frequently due to missing OnPush strategy, business logic embedded in component instead of service, form validation missing on submit allowing invalid data submission, eager loading of feature module increasing initial bundle size, signal or store mutation bypassing immutability causing unpredictable state.
- Evidence request list using expected signals: Angular DevTools change detection cycle profiler, RxJS subscription audit with takeUntilDestroyed or async pipe, bundle size analysis with source-map-explorer, reactive form validator coverage, lazy route chunk boundary in build output, NgRx state trace or signal debugger.
- Deliverables or updates needed: Angular code review findings, RxJS subscription and memory leak recommendations, change detection optimisation plan, component architecture and responsibility findings, lazy loading and bundle size notes, state management correctness assessment.
- Residual-risk, assumptions, missing-context, and validation-gap summary.

## Acceptance Criteria

- Relevant Angular best practices artifacts are identified, current, owned, and versioned where applicable.
- Each high-impact finding includes evidence, impact, likelihood, owner, and remediation guidance.
- Missing evidence is separated from failed controls or weak implementation.
- Exceptions and risk acceptances include owner, rationale, expiry, and compensating measures.
- Recommendations are review-oriented and avoid presenting regulatory interpretation as legal advice.
- Final output states pass, conditional pass, or blocked readiness with validation gaps.

## Anti-Patterns

- Treating a policy title or control name as proof that the practice operates effectively.
- Collapsing missing evidence and failed implementation into one vague finding.
- Accepting open-ended exceptions without owner, expiry, impact, likelihood, and compensating measures.
- Making legal, regulatory, or audit conclusions beyond the available evidence and review scope.
- Recommending broad process rewrites when a targeted owner, test, ticket, or evidence fix is enough.
- Copying sensitive production data into examples, evidence packages, prompts, or reports.

## Changelog

### 1.0.0 - 2026-09-09

- Initial generated production-ready SDLC / DevSecOps skill.