cloudthinker-ai Reviewdog Automated Code Review Management Skill
Manage and analyze Reviewdog linter integrations, PR reviews, and CI configurations.
MANDATORY: Discovery-First Pattern
Always check current Reviewdog configuration and CI setup before modifying review settings.
Phase 1: Discovery
#!/bin/bash
echo "=== Reviewdog Configuration ==="
cat .reviewdog.yml 2>/dev/null || echo "No .reviewdog.yml found"
echo ""
echo "=== CI Integration ==="
grep -r 'reviewdog' .github/workflows/ 2>/dev/null | head -10
echo ""
echo "=== Reviewdog Version ==="
reviewdog --version 2>/dev/null
echo ""
echo "=== Installed Linters ==="
grep -A5 'run:' .reviewdog.yml 2>/dev/null | head -15
Phase 2: Analysis
#!/bin/bash
echo "=== Configured Runners ==="
cat .reviewdog.yml 2>/dev/null | grep -E 'name:|cmd:|format:|level:' | head -20
echo ""
echo "=== Reporter Settings ==="
grep -r 'reporter\|REVIEWDOG_REPORTER' .github/workflows/ 2>/dev/null | head -10
echo ""
echo "=== Workflow Integration ==="
grep -B2 -A10 'reviewdog' .github/workflows/*.yml 2>/dev/null | head -25
Output Rules
- TOKEN EFFICIENCY: Target <=50 lines per output
- List configured linters with their reporters
- Show CI integration points
- Report review comment settings
Common Operations
Run Locally
#!/bin/bash
echo "=== Local Review ==="
reviewdog -list 2>/dev/null | head -10
echo ""
echo "=== Diff Review ==="
reviewdog -diff="git diff main" 2>&1 | head -20
Linter Configuration
#!/bin/bash
echo "=== Available Formats ==="
echo "checkstyle, rdjsonl, rdjson, diff, sarif, golint, eslint, tslint"
echo ""
echo "=== Reporter Options ==="
echo "github-pr-check, github-pr-review, github-check, local, gitlab-mr-discussion"
Safety Rules
- Set appropriate error levels -- warning vs error affects PR merge blocking
- Test linter configurations locally before deploying to CI
- Review filter modes (added, diff_context, file, nofilter) for appropriate scope
- GitHub tokens for reviewdog must have appropriate PR comment permissions
Output Format
Present results as a structured report:
Managing Reviewdog Report
═════════════════════════
Resources discovered: [count]
Resource Status Key Metric Issues
──────────────────────────────────────────────
[name] [ok/warn] [value] [findings]
Summary: [total] resources | [ok] healthy | [warn] warnings | [crit] critical
Action Items: [list of prioritized findings]
Target ≤50 lines of output. Use tables for multi-resource comparisons.
Anti-Hallucination Rules
- NEVER assume resource names — always discover via CLI/API in Phase 1 before referencing in Phase 2.
- NEVER fabricate metric names or dimensions — verify against the service documentation or
--helpoutput. - NEVER mix CLI commands between service versions — confirm which version/API you are targeting.
- ALWAYS use the discovery → verify → analyze chain — every resource referenced must have been discovered first.
- ALWAYS handle empty results gracefully — an empty response is valid data, not an error to retry.
Counter-Rationalizations
| Shortcut | Counter | Why |
|---|---|---|
| "I'll skip discovery and check known resources" | Always run Phase 1 discovery first | Resource names change, new resources appear — assumed names cause errors |
| "The user only asked for a quick check" | Follow the full discovery → analysis flow | Quick checks miss critical issues; structured analysis catches silent failures |
| "Default configuration is probably fine" | Audit configuration explicitly | Defaults often leave logging, security, and optimization features disabled |
| "Metrics aren't needed for this" | Always check relevant metrics when available | API/CLI responses show current state; metrics reveal trends and intermittent issues |
| "I don't have access to that" | Try the command and report the actual error | Assumed permission failures prevent useful investigation; actual errors are informative |