Skip to content
Back to skills

Onex Pr Review

ASecurity

Use this skill when reviewing a pull request for merge readiness. The goal is to produce a priority-organized assessment that clearly communicates what must be fixed before merge.

  • 2 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 1 view
  • Added September 1, 2026
code-qualitygorefactoringgitapisecurityperformance

Works with

  • cursor
  • cli
  • api

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 1, 2026

npx -y skills add Julian0444/omnicursor --skill onex-pr-review --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Onex Pr Review?

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

Security grade badge for Onex Pr Review
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/julian0444-onex-pr-review/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/julian0444-onex-pr-review)

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: "onex-pr-review"
description: >-
  Use this skill when reviewing a pull request for merge readiness. The goal is to produce a priority-organized assessment that clearly communicates what must be fixed before merge.
disable-model-invocation: true
---

# onex-pr-review

Use this skill when reviewing a pull request for merge readiness. The goal is to produce a priority-organized assessment that clearly communicates what must be fixed before merge.

## Purpose

Systematically review all PR changes, classify issues by severity, and produce a merge readiness verdict. This ensures consistent review standards and prevents critical issues from reaching production.

## Prerequisites

- A PR number, branch with open changes, or a pasted diff / list of files to review
- Optional: `gh` CLI for `gh pr view` when you are working against GitHub; if unavailable, use local `git diff` / Cursor diffs instead

## Workflow

1. **Fetch PR context.**
   Run `gh pr view <number> --json title,body,files,reviews,comments` to gather the full picture. Read the changed files locally to understand the actual diff.

2. **Review each changed file.**
   For every modified file, check for: correctness, security issues, performance regressions, missing tests, breaking API changes, and code quality.

3. **Classify findings by priority.**
   Assign each finding exactly one severity level:
   - **CRITICAL** — Security vulnerabilities, data loss risks, crashes, breaking changes. Must fix before merge.
   - **MAJOR** — Performance problems, incorrect behavior, missing tests, significant quality issues. Should fix before merge.
   - **MINOR** — Code quality improvements, missing docs, edge cases, non-critical refactoring. Should address but not blocking.
   - **NIT** — Formatting, naming, minor style suggestions. Optional — can merge with nits remaining.

4. **Assess merge readiness.**
   The PR is merge-ready only when all CRITICAL, MAJOR, and MINOR issues are resolved. NITs do not block merge.

5. **Write the review summary.**
   Output a priority breakdown table, merge readiness verdict, and each finding grouped by severity with file path and description.

## Expected Output Format

A structured review containing:
- Priority breakdown table (count per severity level)
- Merge readiness verdict (ready / not ready)
- Findings grouped by severity (CRITICAL first, then MAJOR, MINOR, NIT)
- Each finding includes: file path, description, and suggested fix

## Quality Checklist

- [ ] All changed files were reviewed
- [ ] Findings use exactly one of CRITICAL / MAJOR / MINOR / NIT
- [ ] Merge readiness verdict is stated explicitly
- [ ] CRITICAL and MAJOR findings include a suggested fix
- [ ] No findings are left unclassified

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…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.