Receiving Code Review
Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions — verify each finding against the codebase, clarify unclear items first, act by severity, push back with evidence when the reviewer is wrong.
Install
$ agentstack add skill-skywalkercyt-mp-implement-receiving-code-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.
Links to your public security report.[](https://agentstack.voostack.com/security/report/skill-skywalkercyt-mp-implement-receiving-code-review) 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
Receiving Code Review
> Adapted skill — discipline originating in Superpowers v5.1.0 (MIT, Jesse Vincent), rewritten in mattpocock-skills style. Governs how reviewer feedback is acted on in /mp-implement-issue step 8 and both pipelines' harvest.
Review feedback is data to evaluate, not orders to follow.
Process
- Verify each finding against the codebase before acting on it. Check it is technically correct for this code, doesn't break existing behavior, and isn't based on missing context.
- Clarify all unclear items before implementing any. Findings may be related; partial understanding produces wrong fixes.
- Act by severity. Fix Critical and Important before proceeding. Minor goes in the PR description or a follow-up issue.
- Implement one item at a time; test each fix and check for regressions.
Pushback
When the reviewer is wrong, push back with technical reasoning and evidence — working tests, the code itself, platform constraints. When a finding conflicts with a prior decision of the user's, put it to the user rather than silently following either side.
When your pushback was wrong, state the correction plainly and fix it. No apology, no defending the original position.
YAGNI check
Before accepting a "do it properly" suggestion, grep for actual usage of the thing being improved. If nothing uses it, propose deleting it instead.
Responding
Respond with the technical action — what you changed, what you verified, or why the finding is wrong. Agreement and gratitude carry no information; the code is the reply.
GitHub threads
Reply to inline review comments in the comment thread, not as a top-level PR comment:
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{pr}/comments/{id}/repliesSource & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: skywalkercyt
- Source: skywalkercyt/mp-implement
- License: MIT
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.