Skip to content
Back to skills

Requesting Code Review Hashgraph Online 2

ASecurity

Use at executor review checkpoints to dispatch the code-reviewer agent with structured context — git range, workflow contracts, and verification evidence.

  • 3 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 3 views
  • Added September 12, 2026
ai-agentsgocode-reviewgit

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 12, 2026

npx -y skills add thedixitjain/the-mega-skill-library --skill requesting-code-review--hashgraph-online-2 --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Requesting Code Review Hashgraph Online 2?

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

Security grade badge for Requesting Code Review  Hashgraph Online 2
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/thedixitjain-requesting-code-review-hashgraph-online-2/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/thedixitjain-requesting-code-review-hashgraph-online-2)

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: requesting-code-review
description: "Use at executor review checkpoints to dispatch the code-reviewer agent with structured context — git range, workflow contracts, and verification evidence."
category: engineering-core
source_repo: hashgraph-online/awesome-codex-plugins
source_path: "plugins/yimwoo/hotl-plugin/skills/requesting-code-review/SKILL.md"
source_url: https://github.com/hashgraph-online/awesome-codex-plugins/blob/HEAD/plugins/yimwoo/hotl-plugin/skills/requesting-code-review/SKILL.md
---


# HOTL Requesting Code Review

## Lifecycle

Executors invoke `requesting-code-review` at defined checkpoints. This skill dispatches the `code-reviewer` agent with structured context. Returned findings are handled by `receiving-code-review`.

## Precondition

Only request review when the checkpoint work is in a reviewable state and its planned verification has completed. Do not request review for code that has failing required verification unless the purpose of the review is to diagnose the failure.

## When to Request Review

### Mandatory Triggers

- **executing-plans:** After each 3-step batch boundary
- **subagent-execution:** After meaningful delegated implementation batches (3+ completed implementation steps, or cross-module change, or high-risk/user-facing/shared-infra change)
- **All executors:** Before final completion (claiming done, merging, or creating a PR)

### Conditional Triggers

- **loop-execution:** At intermediate gates only when the change is high-risk, cross-module, or feature-scale. Always at final completion.
- **Ad-hoc development:** Before merge to main. Optionally when stuck or before a large refactor.

### When NOT to Request

- After trivial single-step changes (typo, config value, import fix)
- Mid-loop iterations that haven't reached a gate
- When the same code was already reviewed and hasn't changed since
- Do not request a second full review when a scoped follow-up review is enough

## Review Base (Deterministic)

The review base defines the git range for the reviewer. Executors record this before starting each reviewable batch.

- **Batch review:** `git rev-parse HEAD` recorded by the executor before starting the batch
- **Final review:** Branch point or last recorded review base, whichever is more recent. A final review is required unless the most recent review already covers all current changes and no code changed afterward.
- **Follow-up review:** `HEAD` immediately before the fix. Re-review only the changed scope unless the fix affects shared architecture, risk level, or multiple modules.

## Dispatch Template

When dispatching the `hotl:code-reviewer` agent, provide this context:

```
Review the following implementation work.

**Review type:** checkpoint | final | follow-up | direct
**Workflow:** {workflow_file} (or "No workflow — reviewing against stated intent")
**Steps reviewed:** {step_range} (or "N/A")
**Git range:** {review_base}..{HEAD_SHA}

**Intent contract:**
- intent: {intent}
- constraints: {constraints}
- success_criteria: {success_criteria}
- risk_level: {risk_level}
(or "No formal contract — review against stated intent and general correctness/risk")

**Implementation summary:**
{summary}

**Changed files:**
{git_diff_stat}

**Verification evidence:**
- Commands run: {verification_commands}
- Outcomes: {pass_fail_status}
- Known gaps: {limitations}

Review against the workflow plan and HOTL contracts (if provided),
or against the stated intent and general correctness/risk.
Produce findings with file:line references.
```

## Acting on Results

1. Invoke `receiving-code-review`
2. Follow Verify → Evaluate → Respond → Implement
3. If any accepted BLOCK finding requires re-review after fix, dispatch a scoped follow-up review
4. Do not proceed past the checkpoint until all BLOCK findings are resolved

## Review Types

- **checkpoint** — executor mid-run at a batch boundary (uses PROCEED/HOLD verdict)
- **final** — executor completing a governed workflow run (uses READY/NOT READY verdict)
- **follow-up** — scoped re-review after fixing BLOCK findings
- **direct** — user-invoked review via `hotl:code-review` (uses READY/NOT READY verdict). Findings are returned to the user without automatically invoking `receiving-code-review`.

---

**Source:** [`hashgraph-online/awesome-codex-plugins`](https://github.com/hashgraph-online/awesome-codex-plugins) → `plugins/yimwoo/hotl-plugin/skills/requesting-code-review/SKILL.md`

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.