How do I install the Reviewing Code skill?

Run npx skillmds add majiayu000/reviewing-code-7 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 Reviewing Code safe to use?

This skill has not completed SkillMD's automated safety review yet. 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 Reviewing Code?

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 Reviewing Code free to use?

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

Who published Reviewing Code?

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

Reviewing Code by majiayu000 — Agent Skill

Name: Reviewing Code
Rating: 4.2 (5 reviews)
Author: majiayu000

Reviewing Code

Analyzes code for bugs, security vulnerabilities, performance issues, and style violations. Use when the user asks for a code review, feedback on specific files, optimization suggestions, or a security audit.

majiayu000 564df79 2 files · 3.3 KB Updated Sep 9, 2026 567 repo stars

File contents

Code Reviewer

When to use this skill

User asks to "review", "audit", or "check" code.
User provides a diff or specific file and asks for improvements.
User asks "is this secure?" or "can this be optimized?".
User requests a second opinion on an implementation.

Workflow

[ ] Contextualize: Identify the programming language, framework, and the user's specific goals (e.g., "make it faster" vs. "fix this bug"). [ ] Security Scan: Check for common vulnerabilities (SQLi, XSS, secrets in code, unsafe inputs). [ ] Logic & Correctness: Verify that the code yields the expected output and handles edge cases. [ ] Performance & Efficiency: Identify O(n^2) loops, unnecessary re-renders, or memory leaks. [ ] Readability & Style: Check naming conventions, modularity (DRY), and adherence to language idioms. [ ] Summary: Present findings prioritized by severity (Critical -> Major -> Minor).

Instructions

1. The Review Mindset

Constructive & Specific: Don't just say "this is bad." Explain why and provide a code snippet showing the better way.
Prioritize:
1. Security (Credentials, Injection, Auth)
2. Crash/Bug Risks (Null pointers, race conditions)
3. Performance (Resource usage, latency)
4. Maintainability (Clean code, comments)

2. Analysis Checklist (Language Agnostic)

Input Validation: Are all external inputs validated/sanitized?
Error Handling: Are try/catch blocks used appropriately? Are errors logged?
Hardcoded Values: Are API keys, URLs, or magic numbers hardcoded?
Complexity: Is a function doing too much? (Cyclomatic complexity).
Testability: Is this code easy to unit test?

3. Output Format

When delivering the review, use this structure:

🔍 Summary

Brief overview of the code quality.

🔴 Critical Issues

Immediate fixes required.

Issue: [Description]
Fix: [Code Snippet]

🟡 Improvements

Optimization and cleanup suggestions.

Suggestion: [Description]

🟢 Good Practices

What the user did well (reinforce good habits).

Resources

OWASP Top 10 Reference

---name: reviewing-code-7description: Analyzes code for bugs, security vulnerabilities, performance issues, and style violations. Use when the user asks for a code review, feedback on specific files, optimization suggestions, or a security audit.--- # Code Reviewer ## When to use this skill - User asks to "review", "audit", or "check" code. - User provides a diff or specific file and asks for improvements. - User asks "is this secure?" or "can this be optimized?". - User requests a second opinion on an implementation. ## Workflow [ ] **Contextualize**: Identify the programming language, framework, and the user's specific goals (e.g., "make it faster" vs. "fix this bug"). [ ] **Security Scan**: Check for common vulnerabilities (SQLi, XSS, secrets in code, unsafe inputs). [ ] **Logic & Correctness**: Verify that the code yields the expected output and handles edge cases. [ ] **Performance & Efficiency**: Identify O(n^2) loops, unnecessary re-renders, or memory leaks. [ ] **Readability & Style**: Check naming conventions, modularity (DRY), and adherence to language idioms. [ ] **Summary**: Present findings prioritized by severity (Critical -> Major -> Minor). ## Instructions ### 1. The Review Mindset - **Constructive & Specific**: Don't just say "this is bad." Explain _why_ and provide a code snippet showing the _better_ way. - **Prioritize**: 1. **Security** (Credentials, Injection, Auth) 2. **Crash/Bug Risks** (Null pointers, race conditions) 3. **Performance** (Resource usage, latency) 4. **Maintainability** (Clean code, comments) ### 2. Analysis Checklist (Language Agnostic) - **Input Validation**: Are all external inputs validated/sanitized? - **Error Handling**: Are try/catch blocks used appropriately? Are errors logged? - **Hardcoded Values**: Are API keys, URLs, or magic numbers hardcoded? - **Complexity**: Is a function doing too much? (Cyclomatic complexity). - **Testability**: Is this code easy to unit test? ### 3. Output Format When delivering the review, use this structure: #### 🔍 Summary _Brief overview of the code quality._ #### 🔴 Critical Issues _Immediate fixes required._ - **Issue**: [Description] - **Fix**: [Code Snippet] #### 🟡 Improvements _Optimization and cleanup suggestions._ - **Suggestion**: [Description] #### 🟢 Good Practices _What the user did well (reinforce good habits)._ ## Resources - [OWASP Top 10 Reference](https://owasp.org/www-project-top-ten/)

Frequently asked questions