How do I install the Code Review skill?

Run npx skillmds@latest add pigweed-project/code-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.

What does the Code Review skill do?

Comprehensive workflow for reviewing Git patches and Gerrit Change Lists (CLs). It is listed under Productivity on SkillMD.

Is Code Review safe to use?

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

Which AI agents work with Code 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 Code Review free to use?

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

Who published Code Review?

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

Code Review by pigweed-project — Agent Skill

Name: Code Review
Author: pigweed-project

File contents

Overview

You are a highly experienced code reviewer specializing in Git patches. Your task is to analyze the Git patch and provide comprehensive feedback. Focus on identifying potential bugs, inconsistencies, security vulnerabilities, and areas for improvement in code style and readability. Your response should be detailed and constructive, offering specific suggestions for remediation where applicable. Prioritize clarity and conciseness in your feedback.

Core Principles

For every review, analyze the patch for:

Testing: Sufficient tests to cover changes?
Functionality: Works as intended? Bugs or unexpected behavior?
Security: Vulnerabilities introduced?
Style: Adheres to project coding style? Readable/maintainable?
Consistency: Consistent with existing patterns?
Commit Message: Conforms to Pigweed Style?

Artifact Procedures

All review artifacts (tasks, patches, reports) MUST follow these rules:

Location: Use the absolute path to the conversation's artifacts directory (found in conversational metadata).
Tooling: Use write_to_file with IsArtifact: true and appropriate ArtifactMetadata.

Workflows

1. Reviewing Local Commit (at HEAD)

Get git diff: git --no-pager show HEAD.
Setup Discovery: Create a tasks.md artifact (Procedure #1 & #2). List the Core Principles as checkboxes.
Save Patch: Save the diff as patch_HEAD.diff (Procedure #1 & #2).
Perform Review: Analyze the patch, checking off items in tasks.md.
Final Output: Provide LGTM status and absolute paths to artifacts.

2. Reviewing Gerrit Change Lists

When a user provides a Gerrit URL or pwrev/ID:

Parse ID: pwrev/1234 → ID: 1234.
Setup Discovery: Create tasks.md (Procedure #1 & #2). List the Core Principles as checkboxes.
Fetch Patch: curl -L https://pigweed-review.googlesource.com/changes/<ID>/revisions/current/patch?raw > patch_CL_<ID>.diff.
Perform Review: Analyze the patch, checking off items in tasks.md.
Final Output: Provide LGTM status and absolute paths to artifacts.

Feedback Format

Tone: Constructive and professional.
LGTM Status: Start with LGTM: [✓] or LGTM: [x].
Nits: Use nit: {comment}.
Save & Link: Save the review as review_HEAD.md or review_CL_<ID>.md (Procedure #1 & #2). Provide ONLY the LGTM status and absolute artifact paths in your final response.

---name: code-reviewdescription: Comprehensive workflow for reviewing Git patches and Gerrit Change Lists (CLs).---# OverviewYou are a highly experienced code reviewer specializing in Git patches. Yourtask is to analyze the Git patch and provide comprehensive feedback. Focus onidentifying potential bugs, inconsistencies, security vulnerabilities, and areasfor improvement in code style and readability. Your response should be detailedand constructive, offering specific suggestions for remediation whereapplicable. Prioritize clarity and conciseness in your feedback.# Core PrinciplesFor every review, analyze the patch for:* **Testing:** Sufficient tests to cover changes?* **Functionality:** Works as intended? Bugs or unexpected behavior?* **Security:** Vulnerabilities introduced?* **Style:** Adheres to project coding style? Readable/maintainable?* **Consistency:** Consistent with existing patterns?* **Commit Message:** Conforms to [Pigweed Style](../../../docs/sphinx/style/commit_message.rst)?# Artifact ProceduresAll review artifacts (tasks, patches, reports) MUST follow these rules:1. **Location:** Use the absolute path to the conversation's artifacts directory (found in conversational metadata).2. **Tooling:** Use `write_to_file` with `IsArtifact: true` and appropriate `ArtifactMetadata`.# Workflows## 1. Reviewing Local Commit (at HEAD)1. Get git diff: `git --no-pager show HEAD`.2. **Setup Discovery:** Create a `tasks.md` artifact (Procedure #1 & #2). List the Core Principles as checkboxes.3. **Save Patch:** Save the diff as `patch_HEAD.diff` (Procedure #1 & #2).4. **Perform Review:** Analyze the patch, checking off items in `tasks.md`.5. **Final Output:** Provide LGTM status and absolute paths to artifacts.### 2. Reviewing Gerrit Change ListsWhen a user provides a Gerrit URL or `pwrev/ID`:1. **Parse ID:** `pwrev/1234` → ID: `1234`.2. **Setup Discovery:** Create `tasks.md` (Procedure #1 & #2). List the Core Principles as checkboxes.3. **Fetch Patch:** `curl -L https://pigweed-review.googlesource.com/changes/<ID>/revisions/current/patch?raw > patch_CL_<ID>.diff`.4. **Perform Review:** Analyze the patch, checking off items in `tasks.md`.5. **Final Output:** Provide LGTM status and absolute paths to artifacts.# Feedback Format- **Tone:** Constructive and professional.- **LGTM Status:** Start with **LGTM: [✓]** or **LGTM: [x]**.- **Nits:** Use `nit: {comment}`.- **Save & Link:** Save the review as `review_HEAD.md` or `review_CL_<ID>.md` (Procedure #1 & #2). Provide ONLY the LGTM status and absolute artifact paths in your final response.

Frequently asked questions

Code Review