Install
$ agentstack add skill-rohitg00-skillkit-structured-review ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
Structured Code Review
You are performing a structured, multi-stage code review. This methodology ensures thorough review while providing actionable, constructive feedback.
Core Principle
Review in stages. Each stage has a specific focus. Don't mix concerns.
A structured review catches more issues and provides better feedback than an unstructured scan.
Review Stages
Stage 1: Requirements Compliance
First, verify the code meets its requirements.
Checklist:
- [ ] Implements stated requirements
- [ ] Handles specified edge cases
- [ ] No scope creep (unexpected additions)
- [ ] No missing functionality
Feedback at this stage:
- "This doesn't appear to handle the case when X is empty"
- "The requirement specified Y, but this implements Z"
- "This adds feature F which wasn't requested - is that intentional?"
Stage 2: Correctness
Next, verify the code works correctly.
Checklist:
- [ ] Logic is sound
- [ ] No obvious bugs
- [ ] Error paths are handled
- [ ] No unfinished code (TODOs without tickets)
Feedback at this stage:
- "This will throw if
useris null" - "The loop exits early before processing all items"
- "What happens when the API call fails?"
Stage 3: Code Quality
Then, evaluate code quality and maintainability.
Checklist:
- [ ] Clear naming
- [ ] Reasonable function/method length
- [ ] No unnecessary complexity
- [ ] Follows project conventions
- [ ] Appropriate abstractions
Feedback at this stage:
- "Could you rename
datatouserProfilefor clarity?" - "This function is doing three things - consider splitting"
- "We use camelCase for variables in this project"
Stage 4: Testing
Evaluate test coverage and quality.
Checklist:
- [ ] New code has tests
- [ ] Tests cover main paths and edge cases
- [ ] Tests are readable and maintainable
- [ ] Tests don't test implementation details
Feedback at this stage:
- "Please add a test for the error case"
- "This test will break if we change the implementation"
- "Consider using a parameterized test for these cases"
Stage 5: Security & Performance
Finally, check for security and performance concerns.
Checklist:
- [ ] No SQL injection, XSS, etc.
- [ ] Secrets not exposed
- [ ] No obvious N+1 queries
- [ ] No unnecessary computation
- [ ] Sensitive data handled correctly
Feedback at this stage:
- "This input should be sanitized before use"
- "Consider adding an index for this query"
- "This API key should come from environment variables"
Writing Good Feedback
Feedback Levels
| Level | When to Use | Example | |-------|-------------|---------| | Blocker | Must fix before merge | "Security: This allows SQL injection" | | Major | Should fix, but not critical | "This will fail for empty arrays" | | Minor | Suggestion, nice to have | "Consider renaming for clarity" | | Nit | Trivial, stylistic | "Extra blank line here" |
Constructive Feedback Template
[Level] [Category]: [Issue]
**What:** [Describe the specific issue]
**Why:** [Explain why it matters]
**Suggestion:** [Offer a specific improvement]
Example:
[Major] Correctness: Null reference possible
**What:** `user.email` is accessed without checking if user exists
**Why:** This will throw TypeError when user is not found
**Suggestion:** Add `if (!user) return null;` before accessing properties
Review Checklist Summary
## Review: [PR Title]
### Stage 1: Requirements
- [ ] Implements requirements
- [ ] Handles edge cases
- [ ] Appropriate scope
### Stage 2: Correctness
- [ ] Logic is sound
- [ ] No bugs
- [ ] Errors handled
### Stage 3: Quality
- [ ] Readable
- [ ] Follows conventions
- [ ] Maintainable
### Stage 4: Testing
- [ ] Has tests
- [ ] Tests are good
### Stage 5: Security/Performance
- [ ] No vulnerabilities
- [ ] No performance issues
### Verdict: [ ] Approve [ ] Request Changes [ ] Comment
Integration with Other Skills
- planning/verification-gates: Review is a key gate
- testing/test-patterns: Evaluate test quality
- testing/anti-patterns: Spot testing issues
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: rohitg00
- Source: rohitg00/skillkit
- License: Apache-2.0
- Homepage: https://skillkit.sh
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.