How do I install the Code Review Repo skill?

Run npx skillmds add majiayu000/code-review-repo 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 Code Review Repo safe to use?

This skill has not completed SkillMD's automated safety review yet. Capability flags: docs only. SkillMD never runs a skill's scripts for you; review the SKILL.md before installing.

Which AI agents work with Code Review Repo?

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 Code Review Repo free to use?

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

Who published Code Review Repo?

majiayu000 (@majiayu000) published this skill. Their other Agent Skills are listed on their SkillMD profile.

Code Review Repo by majiayu000 — Agent Skill

Name: Code Review Repo
Rating: 4.2 (5 reviews)
Author: majiayu000

File contents

Local Code Review

Review the entire local codebase for bugs, issues, and CLAUDE.md compliance.

Process

Gather CLAUDE.md files: Use a Haiku agent to find all CLAUDE.md files in the repository (root and subdirectories)
Identify source files: Determine which files to review:
- Include: .ts, .tsx, .js, .jsx, .py, .rs, .go and similar source files
- Exclude: node_modules/, dist/, .git/, vendor directories, generated files
Multi-agent review: Launch 5 parallel Sonnet agents to independently review the codebase. Each agent returns a list of issues with reasons:
- Agent #1: Audit for CLAUDE.md compliance. Check that code follows guidelines in all relevant CLAUDE.md files.
- Agent #2: Shallow bug scan. Look for obvious bugs, error handling issues, and logic errors. Focus on significant bugs, not nitpicks.
- Agent #3: Git history context. Use git blame and history to identify patterns, recent changes, and potential issues in light of historical context.
- Agent #4: Previous PR comments. Check closed PRs that touched these files for any feedback that might apply.
- Agent #5: Code comment compliance. Ensure code follows any guidance in TODO, FIXME, NOTE, or other code comments.
Confidence scoring: For each issue found, launch a parallel Haiku agent to score confidence (0-100):
- 0: False positive, doesn't hold up to scrutiny
- 25: Might be real, but unverified. Stylistic issues not in CLAUDE.md
- 50: Real but minor, rarely hit in practice
- 75: Verified real issue, important, directly impacts functionality or mentioned in CLAUDE.md
- 100: Definitely real, frequently hit, evidence confirms
Filter: Only report issues with score >= 80

False Positive Examples

Avoid flagging:

Issues that linters/typecheckers catch (imports, types, formatting)
General quality issues unless in CLAUDE.md
Code with lint-ignore comments for that specific issue
Pre-existing issues unrelated to recent changes
Pedantic nitpicks a senior engineer wouldn't mention

Output Format

Code review

Found N issues:

Brief description (CLAUDE.md says "...") file/path.ts:42
Brief description (bug due to missing error handling) file/path.ts:88-95

Or if no issues:

Code review (no issues)

No issues found. Checked for bugs and CLAUDE.md compliance.

---name: code-review-repodescription: Review local codebase for bugs and CLAUDE.md compliance using multi-agent analysis--- # Local Code Review Review the entire local codebase for bugs, issues, and CLAUDE.md compliance. ## Process 1. **Gather CLAUDE.md files**: Use a Haiku agent to find all CLAUDE.md files in the repository (root and subdirectories) 2. **Identify source files**: Determine which files to review: - Include: `.ts`, `.tsx`, `.js`, `.jsx`, `.py`, `.rs`, `.go` and similar source files - Exclude: `node_modules/`, `dist/`, `.git/`, vendor directories, generated files 3. **Multi-agent review**: Launch 5 parallel Sonnet agents to independently review the codebase. Each agent returns a list of issues with reasons: - **Agent #1**: Audit for CLAUDE.md compliance. Check that code follows guidelines in all relevant CLAUDE.md files. - **Agent #2**: Shallow bug scan. Look for obvious bugs, error handling issues, and logic errors. Focus on significant bugs, not nitpicks. - **Agent #3**: Git history context. Use git blame and history to identify patterns, recent changes, and potential issues in light of historical context. - **Agent #4**: Previous PR comments. Check closed PRs that touched these files for any feedback that might apply. - **Agent #5**: Code comment compliance. Ensure code follows any guidance in TODO, FIXME, NOTE, or other code comments. 4. **Confidence scoring**: For each issue found, launch a parallel Haiku agent to score confidence (0-100): - **0**: False positive, doesn't hold up to scrutiny - **25**: Might be real, but unverified. Stylistic issues not in CLAUDE.md - **50**: Real but minor, rarely hit in practice - **75**: Verified real issue, important, directly impacts functionality or mentioned in CLAUDE.md - **100**: Definitely real, frequently hit, evidence confirms 5. **Filter**: Only report issues with score >= 80 ## False Positive Examples Avoid flagging: - Issues that linters/typecheckers catch (imports, types, formatting) - General quality issues unless in CLAUDE.md - Code with lint-ignore comments for that specific issue - Pre-existing issues unrelated to recent changes - Pedantic nitpicks a senior engineer wouldn't mention ## Output Format ### Code review Found N issues: 1. Brief description (CLAUDE.md says "...") `file/path.ts:42` 2. Brief description (bug due to missing error handling) `file/path.ts:88-95` --- Or if no issues: ### Code review (no issues) No issues found. Checked for bugs and CLAUDE.md compliance.

Frequently asked questions