How do I install the Code Review skill?

Run npx skillmds@latest add tomevault-io/code-review-12 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 safe to use?

This skill has not completed SkillMD's automated safety review yet. Independent scanners report: SkillSpector: PASS, Skill Scanner: PASS. 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?

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

Code Review by tomevault-io — Agent Skill

Name: Code Review
Author: tomevault-io

Code Review

Run a comprehensive code review of local changes, analyzing staged and unstaged changes to provide insights, identify issues, and suggest alternative approaches. Use when reviewing code before committing or creating pull requests. Use when this capability is needed.

tomevault-io Updated Sep 17, 2026

File contents

Local Code Review

Run a comprehensive, critical code review of local changes. This skill analyzes staged and unstaged changes to provide insights, identify issues, and suggest alternative approaches.

Instructions

When this skill is invoked:

First, read the detailed agent instructions from .claude/agents/code-review/instructions.md
Gather the current changes using git diff
Analyze the changes following the review framework
Provide a structured report with findings and alternatives

Usage

/code-review              # Review all uncommitted changes
/code-review --staged     # Review only staged changes
/code-review <commit>     # Review changes in a specific commit
/code-review <base>..<head>  # Review changes between commits

Review Process

Step 1: Gather Changes

Based on arguments:

No args: git diff HEAD (all uncommitted changes)
--staged: git diff --staged
<commit>: git show <commit>
<base>..<head>: git diff <base>..<head>

Step 2: Understand Context

For each modified file:

Read the full file to understand surrounding context
Identify the module/component's purpose
Note existing patterns and conventions

Step 3: Analyze Changes

Apply the review framework from .claude/agents/code-review/instructions.md:

Correctness analysis
Design evaluation
Security review
Performance considerations
Maintainability assessment

Step 4: Generate Alternatives

For non-trivial changes, brainstorm alternative approaches:

Different architectural patterns
Alternative algorithms or data structures
Trade-off analysis for each approach

Step 5: Report

Provide a structured report with:

Executive summary
Critical issues (must fix)
Concerns (should consider)
Suggestions (nice to have)
Alternative approaches with trade-offs
Questions for the author

Output Format

# Code Review: [brief description of changes]

## Summary

[2-3 sentence overview of what the changes do and overall assessment]

## Critical Issues

[Issues that would cause bugs, security vulnerabilities, or data loss]

## Concerns

[Design issues, edge cases, potential problems]

## Suggestions

[Improvements, style, minor issues]

## Alternative Approaches

### Alternative 1: [Name]

**Approach:** [Description]
**Trade-offs:**

- Pro: ...
- Con: ...
  **When to prefer:** [Conditions where this is better]

### Alternative 2: [Name]

...

## Questions

[Clarifying questions for the author about intent or requirements]

Severity Definitions

CRITICAL: Bugs, security issues, data loss risks, breaking changes
CONCERN: Design flaws, missing edge cases, unclear intent, potential issues
SUGGESTION: Style, readability, minor optimizations, documentation

Converted and distributed by TomeVault — claim your Tome and manage your conversions.

---name: code-review-12description: Run a comprehensive code review of local changes, analyzing staged and unstaged changes to provide insights, identify issues, and suggest alternative approaches. Use when reviewing code before committing or creating pull requests. Use when this capability is needed.---# Local Code ReviewRun a comprehensive, critical code review of local changes. This skill analyzes staged and unstaged changes to provide insights, identify issues, and suggest alternative approaches.## InstructionsWhen this skill is invoked:1. First, read the detailed agent instructions from `.claude/agents/code-review/instructions.md`2. Gather the current changes using git diff3. Analyze the changes following the review framework4. Provide a structured report with findings and alternatives## Usage```/code-review # Review all uncommitted changes/code-review --staged # Review only staged changes/code-review <commit> # Review changes in a specific commit/code-review <base>..<head> # Review changes between commits```## Review Process### Step 1: Gather ChangesBased on arguments:- No args: `git diff HEAD` (all uncommitted changes)- `--staged`: `git diff --staged`- `<commit>`: `git show <commit>`- `<base>..<head>`: `git diff <base>..<head>`### Step 2: Understand ContextFor each modified file:- Read the full file to understand surrounding context- Identify the module/component's purpose- Note existing patterns and conventions### Step 3: Analyze ChangesApply the review framework from `.claude/agents/code-review/instructions.md`:- Correctness analysis- Design evaluation- Security review- Performance considerations- Maintainability assessment### Step 4: Generate AlternativesFor non-trivial changes, brainstorm alternative approaches:- Different architectural patterns- Alternative algorithms or data structures- Trade-off analysis for each approach### Step 5: ReportProvide a structured report with:1. Executive summary2. Critical issues (must fix)3. Concerns (should consider)4. Suggestions (nice to have)5. Alternative approaches with trade-offs6. Questions for the author## Output Format```markdown# Code Review: [brief description of changes]## Summary[2-3 sentence overview of what the changes do and overall assessment]## Critical Issues[Issues that would cause bugs, security vulnerabilities, or data loss]## Concerns[Design issues, edge cases, potential problems]## Suggestions[Improvements, style, minor issues]## Alternative Approaches### Alternative 1: [Name]**Approach:** [Description]**Trade-offs:**- Pro: ...- Con: ... **When to prefer:** [Conditions where this is better]### Alternative 2: [Name]...## Questions[Clarifying questions for the author about intent or requirements]```## Severity Definitions- **CRITICAL**: Bugs, security issues, data loss risks, breaking changes- **CONCERN**: Design flaws, missing edge cases, unclear intent, potential issues- **SUGGESTION**: Style, readability, minor optimizations, documentation---> Converted and distributed by [TomeVault](https://tomevault.io/claim/kvet) — claim your Tome and manage your conversions.

Frequently asked questions