Provides concise, focused code reviews matching exact task complexity requirements. Use when reviewing code quality, security, or when the user asks for code review.
Scanned 9/5/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qte77/claude-code-plugins --skill reviewing-code --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Reviewing Code?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qte77-reviewing-code)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: reviewing-code
description: Provides concise, focused code reviews matching exact task complexity requirements. Use when reviewing code quality, security, or when the user asks for code review.
compatibility: Designed for Claude Code
metadata:
allowed-tools: Read, Grep, Glob, WebFetch, WebSearch
argument-hint: [file-or-directory]
stability: stable
content-hash: sha256:aac832c4eeac1975cea660d8ad904ba0d68e98629fa43d65b2b8a8f4ea7d55cb
last-verified-cc-version: 1.0.34
---
# Review Context
- Changed files: !`git diff --name-only HEAD~1 2>/dev/null || echo "No recent commits"`
- Staged files: !`git diff --staged --name-only`
## Code Review
**Scope**: $ARGUMENTS
Delivers **focused, streamlined** code reviews matching stated task
requirements exactly. No over-analysis.
## Python Standards
See `references/python-best-practices.md` for comprehensive Python guidelines.
## Workflow
1. **Read task requirements** to understand expected scope
2. **Check `make validate`** passes before detailed review
3. **Match review depth** to task complexity (simple vs complex)
4. **Validate requirements** - does implementation match task scope exactly?
5. **Issue focused feedback** with specific file paths and line numbers
## Review Strategy
**Simple Tasks (100-200 lines)**: Security, compliance, requirements match,
basic quality
**Complex Tasks (500+ lines)**: Above plus architecture, performance,
comprehensive testing
**Always**: Use existing project patterns, immediate use after implementation
## Review Checklist
**Security & Compliance**:
- [ ] No security vulnerabilities (injection, XSS, etc.)
- [ ] Follows @AGENTS.md mandatory requirements
- [ ] Passes `make validate`
**Requirements Match**:
- [ ] Implements exactly what was requested
- [ ] No over-engineering or scope creep
- [ ] Appropriate complexity level
**Code Quality**:
- [ ] Follows project patterns in `src/`
- [ ] Proper type hints and docstrings
- [ ] Tests cover stated functionality
**Structural Health**:
- [ ] No function exceeds cognitive complexity threshold (suggested default: 15 per function, overridable per-project)
- [ ] No copy-paste duplication across methods (watch for repeated dispatch chains)
- [ ] File aggregate complexity — flag if trending above project norms (suggested default: 50 per file, overridable per-project)
## Output Standards
**Simple Tasks**: CRITICAL issues only, clear approval when requirements met
**Complex Tasks**: CRITICAL/WARNINGS/SUGGESTIONS with specific fixes
**All reviews**: Concise, streamlined, no unnecessary complexity analysis
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!