npx agentspec-cli install 42c28a1e-13cf-418d-a3aa-561582e02f3b --framework ClaudeCode→ .claude/skills/sdd-review/SKILL.md
# SDD Code Review
Perform comprehensive code reviews in the style of Linus Torvalds - direct, thorough, and focused on what matters: correctness, simplicity, and long-term maintainability.
## Review Philosophy
> "Talk is cheap. Show me the code."
> — Linus Torvalds
This review focuses on:
1. **Correctness** - Does it actually work? Does it handle edge cases?
2. **Simplicity** - Is it more complex than necessary?
3. **Maintainability** - Will future developers understand this?
4. **Convention Adherence** - Does it follow project patterns?
## Workflow
### Step 1: Identify Review Scope
Determine what to review:
- **Single file**: `/sdd-review src/services/UserService.ts`
- **Directory**: `/sdd-review src/services/`
- **Git diff**: `/sdd-review HEAD~3..HEAD`
- **PR/MR**: `/sdd-review PR-123` or `/sdd-review MR-45`
### Step 2: Load Project Context
Before reviewing:
1. Read project steering documents from `.spec/steering/`
2. Understand existing patterns in the codebase
3. Check if there's a related spec in `.spec/specs/`
### Step 3: Perform Review
#### Code Correctness Checks
```markdown
## Correctness Issues
### Critical
- [ ] Logic errors that will cause bugs
- [ ] Race conditions or threading issues
- [ ] Resource leaks (files, connections, memory)
- [ ] Unhandled error conditions
### Important
- [ ] Edge cases not handled
- [ ] Assumptions that may not hold
- [ ] Off-by-one errors
- [ ] Type mismatches or unsafe casts
```
#### Simplicity Assessment
Ask these questions:
- Could this be done with less code?
- Is there a standard library function for this?
- Is this abstraction earning its keep?
- Would a junior developer understand this in 6 months?
#### Pattern Violations
Check against project conventions:
```markdown
## Pattern Violations
### Naming
- [ ] Variables don't follow naming convention
- [ ] Functions named for implementation, not purpose
### Structure
- [ ] Logic in wrong layer (controller doing business logic)
- [ ] Missing separation of concerns
- [ ] Circular dependencies introduced
### Error Handling
- [ ] Swallowed exceptions
- [ ] Generic error messages
- [ ] Missing error propagation
```
### Step 4: Provide Feedback
Structure feedback with clear categories:
```markdown
# Code Review: {file/PR description}
## Summary
Brief overall assessment (1-2 sentences)
## 🚨 Must Fix (Blocking)
Issues that must be resolved before merge:
1. **Line 42**: Memory leak - connection never closed
```diff
- const conn = await getConnection();
+ const conn = await getConnection();
+ try { ... } finally { conn.close(); }
```
## ⚠️ Should Fix (Non-blocking)
Issues that should be addressed but won't block:
1. **Line 78**: Magic number should be a named constant
2. **Line 103**: Consider extracting this to a helper function
## 💡 Suggestions (Optional)
Improvements that would be nice but are truly optional:
1. **Line 156**: This could be simplified with `Array.flatMap()`
## ✅ What's Good
Acknowledge good patterns to reinforce them:
1. Good use of dependency injection
2. Clear separation of concerns
3. Comprehensive error handling in auth module
```
### Step 5: Verify Tests
For any code changes:
1. Check if tests exist for modified code
2. Verify edge cases are tested
3. Run existing tests to ensure no regressions
```bash
# Run tests for affected files
npm test -- --findRelatedTests {changed-files}
```
## Review Severity Levels
| Level | Meaning | Action Required |
|-------|---------|-----------------|
| 🚨 **Critical** | Bug, security issue, data loss risk | Must fix before merge |
| ⚠️ **Warning** | Code smell, potential issue | Should fix, discuss if disagree |
| 💡 **Info** | Suggestion, style preference | Optional, author's choice |
## Common Issues to Watch For
### TypeScript/JavaScript Specific
- `any` type usage without justification
- Missing null/undefined checks
- Promises not awaited
- Event listener memory leaks
- Mutable shared state
### General
- Functions doing too much
- Deep nesting (> 3 levels)
- Boolean parameters (use options object)
- Comments explaining *what* instead of *why*
- Dead code or unused imports
## Integration with SDD Workflow
When reviewing implementation:
1. Compare against requirements in `.spec/specs/{feature}/requirements.md`
2. Verify design patterns from `.spec/specs/{feature}/design.md`
3. Check task completion against `.spec/specs/{feature}/tasks.md`
## Example Review
```markdown
# Code Review: UserAuthService.ts
## Summary
Good overall structure but has a critical security issue and some error handling gaps.
## 🚨 Must Fix
1. **Line 67**: Password stored in plain text in error log
```typescript
// BAD: Leaks credentials
logger.error(`Login failed for ${email} with password ${password}`);
// GOOD: Never log credentials
logger.error(`Login failed for ${email}`);
```
## ⚠️ Should Fix
1. **Line 89**: Catch block swallows all errors
2. **Line 112-130**: This block should be extracted to a private method
## ✅ What's Good
- Clean separation between auth logic and data access
- Good use of TypeScript discriminated unions for auth result
- Comprehensive input validation
```
Built on the Agent Skills standard
review
Review code for quality, style, and potential issues. Use when code has been written or modified, when user asks for code review, or when TDD autonomous mode needs quality assessment. Supports configurable strictness levels.
by AgentHub Crawler
code-review-and-quality
Conducts multi-axis code review. Use before merging any change. Use when reviewing code written by yourself, another agent, or a human. Use when you need to assess code quality across multiple dimensions before it enters the main branch. Use when asked to review a diff or a pull request, even when the diff is pasted inline.
by AgentHub Crawler
review
Quick code review for files or recent changes, checking for bugs, best practices, and potential improvements
by AgentHub Crawler
Sign in to leave a comment.
Code Review
Cursor IDE rules and conventions for AI-assisted development.
by AgentHub Crawler