Top-level, user-facing code-review workflow for verified issues in specific files, functions, diffs, or code sections. Use when the user directly requests a review and may need to adjudicate its findings. Do not use as an orchestrator for a delegated leaf review or finding-validation task.
Scanned 9/5/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add photostructure/coding-skills --skill review --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Review?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/photostructure-review-coding-skills)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: review
description: Top-level, user-facing code-review workflow for verified issues in specific files, functions, diffs, or code sections. Use when the user directly requests a review and may need to adjudicate its findings. Do not use as an orchestrator for a delegated leaf review or finding-validation task.
metadata:
website: "https://photostructure.com/coding/claude-code-review/"
---
# Code Review
## Leaf-mode guard
If the task identifies your role as `leaf-reviewer` or sets
`delegation-budget: 0`, read and follow
[`references/single-pass.md`](./references/single-pass.md), complete one review
yourself, return the report to the caller, and stop.
## Run the review
Read and follow [`references/single-pass.md`](./references/single-pass.md), then
[`references/orchestration.md`](./references/orchestration.md). The latter's
user-facing response rules replace the former's leaf return behavior.
## Scratch files
Any copy this workflow makes — of the repo, of a build-output directory, of a
file you replay edits onto — belongs in the operating system's temporary
directory, in a fresh directory named for the project and the purpose. Never
inside the checkout, and never under a home directory.
Delete it before you finish. A repo or build-output copy runs to gigabytes,
nothing reaps a home directory, and the out-of-disk failure that eventually
follows surfaces somewhere unrelated — a test suite that hangs, a build that
dies mid-link — costing far more to diagnose than the copy ever saved.
## Adapting for your project
- **Name your standards explicitly** in
[`references/single-pass.md`](./references/single-pass.md) — `AGENTS.md`,
optional `CLAUDE.md`, `docs/DESIGN-PRINCIPLES.md` — in place of the generic
"relevant design documents".
- **Add project-specific "what to look for" items** to the same file, e.g. "new
public APIs have rate limiting", "DB queries use parameterized inputs", "error
messages don't leak internal paths".
- **Tune the exclusion list** there if your team *does* want style or refactor
feedback. The default is strict because noise is the bigger problem.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!