# Ccc Review

> audit current branch, security posture, performance hotpaths, or run full project x-ray. Spawns the matching specialist agent in the background; findings land at…

- Skill: `kevinzai/ccc-review` (Agent Skill)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add kevinzai/ccc-review`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/kevinzai/ccc-review/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: AI & ML
- Author: KevinZai (https://skillmd.com/u/kevinzai)
- Updated: 2026-09-17
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/kevinzai/ccc-review

---


# /ccc-review — Audit your work

Click-first review flow. Four audit types, one specialist agent per pick, one scorecard artifact. User picks the lens, the agent works in the background, the markdown report lands in `tasks/reviews/`.

> Broad reviews/audits run **workflow-first** — fan out by dimension, adversarially verify findings before acting. See `commander/cowork-plugin/rules/workflow-first.md`.

## Session markers

- At the START of review (after user picks an audit type): call `mcp__ccd_session__mark_chapter` with `title: "Code review: <branch>"` and `summary: "<audit-type> audit on <branch>"`.
- At COMPLETION (when the agent reports back or findings are surfaced): call `mcp__ccd_session__mark_chapter` with `title: "Review complete"` and `summary: "<N> findings — <blocker-count> blocking"`.

## Sidebar chips (spawn_task)

**Refute before chips (Agent fallback only — the workflows already verify):** when findings came from the Agent-based flow, dispatch ONE fresh refute agent before any chip fires: "Adversarially verify these findings — try to REFUTE each. Default verdict PLAUSIBLE unless you confirm it from the actual code (then CONFIRMED); drop anything you refute." Only CONFIRMED 🔴/🟠 findings become chips; PLAUSIBLE ones stay as markdown bullets marked for manual confirmation.

After findings are verified, spawn ONE `mcp__ccd_session__spawn_task` chip per **confirmed 🔴 Critical** or **🟠 High** blocker — each chip is a self-contained action for a fresh session:

- `title`: imperative phrase under 60 chars (e.g., `"Fix SQL injection in src/auth.ts:42"`)
- `prompt`: self-contained — include file path, line number, issue summary, CWE/OWASP reference if applicable, and suggested fix direction. The spawned session has no memory of this conversation.
- `tldr`: 1-2 sentences plain English, no code blocks.

**For 🟡 Medium and ℹ️ Nit findings:** surface via markdown bullets + `TodoWrite` only — NOT spawn_task chips. Chips are for blockers that warrant a dedicated fix session.

## Response shape (EVERY time)

Output exactly these three sections in order:

### 1. Brand header (one line, markdown)

```
**CC Commander** · /ccc-review · Audit before you ship
```

### 2. Context strip (one paragraph)

Detect review context with **four quick reads** (parallel Bash, silent on failure):
- `git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD` → current branch
- `git rev-list --count main..HEAD 2>/dev/null` → commits ahead of main
- `git diff --shortstat main..HEAD 2>/dev/null` → diff size
- `test -d .github/workflows && echo yes` → CI presence

Render one line:
> 🧭 Branch: `<branch>` · <N> commits ahead of main · <X> files / <Y> lines changed · CI: `<yes/no>`

If no diff detected: "🧭 No diff vs main — I'll audit the whole project instead (xray recommended)."

### 3. The picker — `AskUserQuestion` with 4 audit types

Read `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/menus/ccc-review.json` for canonical option data. Surface the 4 non-back choices.

```
question: "What should I audit?"
header: "CC Commander Review"
multiSelect: false
options:
  - label: "📊 Review current branch"
    description: "Diff vs main — PR-quality summary before you open a PR."
    preview: "<N> commits · <X> lines · reviewer agent does a full 4-dimension pass."
  - label: "🔐 Security audit"
    description: "OWASP Top 10 + secrets + dependency audit. Severity-rated report."
    preview: "security-auditor agent. Catches injection, auth flaws, exposed secrets, vulnerable deps."
  - label: "⚡ Performance"
    description: "Hot-path scan, bundle size, N+1 queries, flame-graph pointers."
    preview: "performance-engineer agent. Flags hot paths, unbounded queries, resource leaks."
  - label: "🩻 Full project x-ray"
    description: "Health scorecard across code, docs, tests, deps, CI."
    preview: "Routes to ccc-xray — full health pass, not just the diff."
```

**Recommendation logic** (prepend ⭐ to ONE label):
- Branch ahead of main + uncommitted changes → ⭐ "Review current branch"
- `package.json` touched in diff → ⭐ "Security audit" (new deps = supply-chain risk)
- SQL / ORM files in diff → ⭐ "Security audit"
- Empty diff → ⭐ "Full project x-ray"
- Hot-path files (`*/api/*`, `*/routes/*`, `*/hot/*`) in diff → ⭐ "Performance"

### Native workflow (Claude Code v2.1.154+)

If the `Workflow` tool is available, prefer invoking the bundled deep-review workflow for the **"Review current branch"** audit type instead of the Agent-based flow:

```js
Workflow({
  scriptPath: "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/workflows/ccc-deep-review.workflow.js",
  args: { base: "main" }
})
```

The workflow reviews the diff across 4 weighted dimensions (security 35%, performance 25%, correctness 25%, maintainability 15%), adversarially verifies each finding, and returns only confirmed issues — reducing false positives before they reach you.

For the **Security** and **Performance** audit types, route through the bundled audit workflow — it already supports scoped dimensions with REFUTE-framed verification of every finding:

```js
// Security audit
Workflow({
  scriptPath: "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/workflows/ccc-audit.workflow.js",
  args: { dimensions: ["security", "deps"] }
})

// Performance audit
Workflow({
  scriptPath: "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/workflows/ccc-audit.workflow.js",
  args: { dimensions: ["performance"] }
})
```

Only **Full x-ray** stays on its own route (`ccc-xray` skill).

If `Workflow` is unavailable (older client or tool not allowed), fall back to the Agent-based flow below — leave that flow intact.

## Step 2 — Dispatch matching specialist agent

On user pick, immediately dispatch the right agent in background. **Never block the UI.**

**"Review current branch" (diff):**
- `Agent` tool, `subagent_type: general-purpose`, `model: sonnet`, `run_in_background: true`
- Agent: invoke `reviewer` persona (see `commander/cowork-plugin/agents/reviewer.md`)
- Prompt: "Run the 4-dimension review (Security 35% / Performance 25% / Correctness 25% / Maintainability 15%) on `git diff main..HEAD`. Write findings to `tasks/reviews/ccc-review-<YYYYMMDD>-diff.md`. Group by severity (Critical / High / Medium / Low / Nit). Include file:line citations + suggested fixes. Return the artifact path + blocker count."

**"Security audit":**
- Same background pattern, invoke `security-auditor` persona (`agents/security-auditor.md`)
- Prompt: "Run OWASP Top 10 sweep on the diff (or whole codebase if no diff). Check: secrets in source, SQL injection, XSS, auth/authz flaws, insecure deserialization, SSRF, path traversal. Also run `npm audit` / `pip audit` if applicable. Severity-rate (🔴 Critical / 🟠 High / 🟡 Medium / 🟢 Low / ℹ️ Info) with CWE IDs. Write findings to `tasks/reviews/ccc-review-<YYYYMMDD>-security.md`."

**"Performance":**
- Same pattern, invoke `performance-engineer` persona (`agents/performance-engineer.md`)
- Prompt: "Hot-path audit. Scan for: N+1 queries, O(n²) in hot paths, unbounded loops/queries, missing indexes, resource leaks, bundle bloat. If `.next/`, `dist/`, or `build/` exists, check bundle size. Write findings to `tasks/reviews/ccc-review-<YYYYMMDD>-perf.md`. Flag estimated vs measured impact explicitly."

**"Full project x-ray":**
- Route to the `ccc-xray` skill — do NOT spawn the agent here. Emit: "Loading x-ray workflow — `ccc-xray` runs a full health scorecard across code, docs, tests, deps, CI."
- Then behave as if the user had invoked `/ccc-xray` directly.

## Step 3 — Return progress card to user

After dispatching the agent, emit ONE short card:

> 🔍 **Audit running in background** — `<audit-type>` on `<branch>`, agent ID `<id>`, ETA ~1–3 min.
> 📂 Findings will land at `tasks/reviews/ccc-review-<YYYYMMDD>-<type>.md`.
> 💡 Come back with `/ccc-review status` — I'll report blocker count + artifact path when done.

## Anti-patterns — DO NOT do these

- ❌ Run the review inline — ALWAYS `run_in_background: true`
- ❌ Write findings to stdout only — every review produces a markdown artifact
- ❌ Use a single agent for all audit types — each has a specialist persona
- ❌ Skip severity grouping — reviewers MUST rate Critical / High / Medium / Low / Nit
- ❌ Offer more than 4 audit types in the picker
- ❌ Forget `tasks/reviews/` directory — create it if missing (Bash `mkdir -p`)

## Argument handling

- `/ccc-review` → root picker
- `/ccc-review diff` → skip picker, dispatch reviewer agent immediately
- `/ccc-review security` → skip picker, dispatch security-auditor
- `/ccc-review perf` → skip picker, dispatch performance-engineer
- `/ccc-review xray` → route to `ccc-xray` skill
- `/ccc-review <anything else>` → treat as free-form audit question; confirm scope with one AUQ, then dispatch reviewer

## Artifact format (every review writes this)

```markdown
# CCC Review — <type> — <YYYY-MM-DD>

**Branch:** <branch> · **Base:** main · **Diff:** <X> files / <Y> lines
**Agent:** <persona> · **Duration:** <Nm Ns>

## Summary
- <total findings> findings — <blocker count> blocking
- Overall verdict: Approve / Request Changes / Needs Discussion
- Overall risk: Low / Medium / High

## Findings

Every finding carries a verification verdict: **CONFIRMED** (independently verified against the actual code) or **PLAUSIBLE** (reported but not yet reproduced — verify before acting).

### 🔴 Critical (N)
- `file:line` — `<issue>` — **Verdict:** `CONFIRMED|PLAUSIBLE` — **Fix:** `<suggested fix>` — **Why:** `<rationale>`

### 🟠 High (N)
...

### 🟡 Medium (N)
...

### ℹ️ Nits (N)
...

## Next actions
1. ...
```

## Brand rules

- Emoji-forward — 🔍 for audit, 🔴🟠🟡🟢 for severity, ✅ for approve, ❌ for block
- One artifact per audit — never delete previous reviews (keep history)
- Never mention the CLI — Desktop-plugin flow
- Always write to `tasks/reviews/` — Ship flow reads from there

---

**Bottom line:** four audit tiles → matching specialist agent → one markdown artifact. User never waits, findings always traceable.

---

> ⚙️ **Fable contract:** plan before build · verifier ≠ worker · prove before alarm · loops need gates · leave durable state — `rules/fable-method.md`