How do I install the Git Review skill?

Run npx skillmds@latest add grimlink/git-review in your terminal (requires Node.js), paste this page's agent-chat prompt into Claude, Cursor, or any MCP-connected agent, or download the SKILL.md file and copy it into your agent's skills directory.

Is Git Review safe to use?

This skill has not completed SkillMD's automated safety review yet. Independent scanners report: SkillSpector: PASS, Skill Scanner: PASS. Capability flags: makes network calls. SkillMD never runs a skill's scripts for you; review the SKILL.md before installing.

Which AI agents work with Git Review?

This skill is tagged as working with Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex. SKILL.md is an open format, so most agents that read a skills directory can load it too.

Is Git Review free to use?

Yes. Installing skills from SkillMD is free, and the skill stays under its author's original license.

Who published Git Review?

GrimLink (@grimlink) published this skill. Their other Agent Skills are listed on their SkillMD profile.

Git Review by grimlink — Agent Skill

Name: Git Review
Rating: 4.5 (4 reviews)
Author: GrimLink

File contents

1. Fetch the changes

If a GitHub PR URL or number is provided, fetch details and diff via gh:

gh pr view <number-or-url> --json title,body,additions,deletions,files,reviews,statusCheckRollup,headRefName,baseRefName
gh pr diff <number-or-url>

If gh cannot access the repository, a GitLab MR is referenced, or no URL is given, ask the user to paste the diff directly. A local diff also works:

git diff main...<branch>

2. Check CI status

If fetched via gh, check statusCheckRollup. If any checks are failing or still pending, inform the user and stop — do not review until CI is green.

3. Review the changes

Review the diff thoroughly and critically. Do not just validate what is there — look for what is wrong or missing.

Cover the following areas, skipping any that are not relevant:

Bugs and logic errors: incorrect assumptions, edge cases, off-by-one errors, unhandled states
Code quality: readability, naming, unnecessary complexity, duplication
Security: injection risks, exposed secrets, improper input handling, unsafe defaults
Performance: unnecessary work, inefficient patterns, missing caching where appropriate
Correctness: does the implementation match the intent described in the title or description

Group feedback by file or concern. For each issue, state what the problem is and suggest a concrete fix. If something is genuinely good or well-handled, you may note it briefly, but focus on what needs attention.

Be direct. Do not soften criticism or add filler. If the changes look fine, say so plainly.

4. Post feedback

If the review was fetched via gh and there are issues, post a review comment:

gh pr review <number> --request-changes --body "..."

If the changes look good, say so and leave approval to the user.

---name: git-reviewdescription: Review code changes, pull requests, or merge requests for bugs, code quality, security, and maintainability. Use when asked to review a PR, MR, diff, or set of changes. Also handles GitHub PRs and GitLab MRs.---## 1. Fetch the changesIf a GitHub PR URL or number is provided, fetch details and diff via `gh`:```gh pr view <number-or-url> --json title,body,additions,deletions,files,reviews,statusCheckRollup,headRefName,baseRefNamegh pr diff <number-or-url>```If `gh` cannot access the repository, a GitLab MR is referenced, or no URL is given, ask the user to paste the diff directly. A local diff also works:```git diff main...<branch>```## 2. Check CI statusIf fetched via `gh`, check `statusCheckRollup`. If any checks are failing or still pending, inform the user and stop — do not review until CI is green.## 3. Review the changesReview the diff thoroughly and critically. Do not just validate what is there — look for what is wrong or missing.Cover the following areas, skipping any that are not relevant:- **Bugs and logic errors:** incorrect assumptions, edge cases, off-by-one errors, unhandled states- **Code quality:** readability, naming, unnecessary complexity, duplication- **Security:** injection risks, exposed secrets, improper input handling, unsafe defaults- **Performance:** unnecessary work, inefficient patterns, missing caching where appropriate- **Correctness:** does the implementation match the intent described in the title or descriptionGroup feedback by file or concern. For each issue, state what the problem is and suggest a concrete fix. If something is genuinely good or well-handled, you may note it briefly, but focus on what needs attention.Be direct. Do not soften criticism or add filler. If the changes look fine, say so plainly.## 4. Post feedbackIf the review was fetched via `gh` and there are issues, post a review comment:```gh pr review <number> --request-changes --body "..."```If the changes look good, say so and leave approval to the user.

Frequently asked questions

Git Review