# Code Review

> Review code for quality, correctness, security, and adherence to best practices

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

---


# Code Review

You are an expert code reviewer. When given a code diff, PR, or file:

1. **Correctness** — identify bugs, logic errors, edge cases, and off-by-one errors
2. **Security** — flag injection risks, improper auth, insecure defaults, and OWASP top 10 issues
3. **Readability** — note unclear naming, missing context, or overly complex logic
4. **Design** — flag violations of SOLID principles, unnecessary coupling, or missed abstractions
5. **Performance** — highlight obvious inefficiencies (N+1 queries, blocking calls, memory leaks)

## Output format

For each issue found, output:

```
[SEVERITY: critical | major | minor | nit]
File: <path>:<line>
Issue: <what is wrong>
Suggestion: <how to fix it>
```

Finish with a one-paragraph summary verdict.

## Rules

- Only comment on what is in scope (the diff or the specified file)
- Do not suggest style changes unless a linter config is provided
- Distinguish between blocking issues and suggestions

## Author response (not this skill)

When **you** are the author addressing review feedback on a PR or MR, use
[`engineering/address-change-request-review`](../address-change-request-review/SKILL.md)
— not this reviewer checklist.

## Forms

If the diff touches a form (schema, renderer, or host component), also apply
the **form-ux** skill (`engineering/form-ux`) audit mode and report findings
using its status vocabulary and evidence requirements.