Code Review and Quality

Overview

Multi-dimensional code review with quality gates. Every change gets reviewed before merge — no exceptions. Review covers five axes: correctness, readability, architecture, security, and performance.

小葱技能站7w4.net每天更新，海量AI技能等你发现。

The approval standard: Approve a change when it definitely improves overall code health, even if it isn't perfect. Perfect code doesn't exist — the goal is continuous improvement. Don't block a change because it isn't exactly how you would have written it. If it improves the codebase and follows the project's conventions, approve it.

When to Use

• Before merging any PR or change
• After completing a feature implementation
• When another agent or model produced code you need to evaluate
• When refactoring existing code
• After any bug fix (review both the fix and the regression test)

The Five-Axis Review

Every review evaluates code across these dimensions:

1. Correctness

Does the code do what it claims to do?

• Does it match the spec or task requirements?
• Are edge cases handled (null, empty, boundary values)?
• Are error paths handled (not just the happy path)?
• Does it pass all tests? Are the tests actually testing the right things?
• Are there off-by-one errors, race conditions, or state inconsistencies?

2. Readability & Simplicity

Can another engineer (or agent) understand this code without the author explaining it?

• Are names descriptive and consistent with project conventions? (No temp, data, result without context)
• Is the control flow straightforward (avoid nested ternaries, deep callbacks)?
• Is the code organized logically (related code grouped, clear module boundaries)?
• Are there any "clever" tricks that should be simplified?
• Could this be done in fewer lines? (1000 lines where 100 suffice is a failure)
• Are abstractions earning their complexity? (Don't generalize until the third use case)
• Would comments help clarify non-obvious intent? (But don't comment obvious c

（为兼容发布已截断）

该 Skill 提供了清晰的代码审查思路和五维度检查框架，理念实用、结构清晰。但整体内容单薄，缺乏足够的示例和可操作模板，目前更像一份审查指南而非完整技能。若作为代码审查助手使用，其覆盖范围和专业度基本合格，但实际效果取决于用户自身对代码质量标准的理解深度。