# Aif Review

> Perform code review on staged changes or a pull request. Checks for bugs, security issues, performance problems, and best practices. Use when user says "review code", "check my code", "review PR", or "is this code okay".

- Skill: `majiayu000/aif-review` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 2 files)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds add majiayu000/aif-review`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/majiayu000/aif-review/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Security
- Author: majiayu000 (https://skillmd.com/u/majiayu000)
- Updated: 2026-09-09
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/majiayu000/aif-review

---


# Code Review Assistant

Perform thorough code reviews focusing on correctness, security, performance, and maintainability.

## Behavior

### Without Arguments (Review Staged Changes)

1. Run `git diff --cached` to get staged changes
2. If nothing staged, run `git diff` for unstaged changes
3. Analyze each file's changes

### With PR Number/URL

1. Use `gh pr view <number> --json` to get PR details
2. Use `gh pr diff <number>` to get the diff
3. Review all changes in the PR

## Review Checklist

### Correctness
- [ ] Logic errors or bugs
- [ ] Edge cases handling
- [ ] Null/undefined checks
- [ ] Error handling completeness
- [ ] Type safety (if applicable)

### Security
- [ ] SQL injection vulnerabilities
- [ ] XSS vulnerabilities
- [ ] Command injection
- [ ] Sensitive data exposure
- [ ] Authentication/authorization issues
- [ ] CSRF protection
- [ ] Input validation

### Performance
- [ ] N+1 query problems
- [ ] Unnecessary re-renders (React)
- [ ] Memory leaks
- [ ] Inefficient algorithms
- [ ] Missing indexes (database)
- [ ] Large payload sizes

### Best Practices
- [ ] Code duplication
- [ ] Dead code
- [ ] Magic numbers/strings
- [ ] Proper naming conventions
- [ ] SOLID principles
- [ ] DRY principle

### Testing
- [ ] Test coverage for new code
- [ ] Edge cases tested
- [ ] Mocking appropriateness

## Output Format

```markdown
## Code Review Summary

**Files Reviewed:** [count]
**Risk Level:** 🟢 Low / 🟡 Medium / 🔴 High

### Critical Issues
[Must be fixed before merge]

### Suggestions
[Nice to have improvements]

### Questions
[Clarifications needed]

### Positive Notes
[Good patterns observed]
```

## Review Style

- Be constructive, not critical
- Explain the "why" behind suggestions
- Provide code examples when helpful
- Acknowledge good code
- Prioritize feedback by importance
- Ask questions instead of making assumptions

## Examples

**User:** `/aif-review`
Review staged changes in current repository.

**User:** `/aif-review 123`
Review PR #123 using GitHub CLI.

**User:** `/aif-review https://github.com/org/repo/pull/123`
Review PR from URL.

## Integration

If GitHub MCP is configured, can:
- Post review comments directly to PR
- Request changes or approve
- Add labels based on review outcome

> **Tip:** Context is heavy after code review. Consider `/clear` or `/compact` before continuing with other tasks.

