AgentStack
SKILL verified MIT Self-run

Review Pr

skill-viknesh20-20-claude-code-tool-kit-review-pr · by viknesh20-20

Performs a comprehensive pull request code review covering correctness, security, performance, test coverage, and coding standards. Use when reviewing any code changes before merge.

No reviews yet
0 installs
17 views
0.0% view→install

Install

$ agentstack add skill-viknesh20-20-claude-code-tool-kit-review-pr

✓ scanned · ✓ verified — works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.

Security review

✓ Passed

No 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.

Are you the author of Review Pr? Claim this listing to set pricing, connect Stripe payouts, and keep 70% of every sale.
Sign up to claim

About

Pull Request Code Review

Gather Context

Changed Files

!git diff --name-only HEAD~1 2>/dev/null || echo "No commits to diff"

Diff Summary

!git diff --stat HEAD~1 2>/dev/null || echo "No diff available"

Full Diff

!git diff HEAD~1 2>/dev/null | head -500

Recent Commits

!git log --oneline -10 2>/dev/null


Review Checklist

Analyze every changed file against the following categories. For each finding, provide:

  • File path and line number
  • Severity: Critical / High / Medium / Low
  • Description of the issue
  • Suggested fix with code snippet

1. Correctness

  • Logic errors or off-by-one mistakes
  • Missing null/undefined/nil checks
  • Incomplete error handling
  • Race conditions or concurrency issues
  • Incorrect use of APIs or library functions

2. Security

  • Input validation gaps (SQL injection, XSS, command injection, path traversal)
  • Hardcoded secrets, tokens, or credentials
  • Authentication/authorization bypass risks
  • Insecure data handling (PII exposure, logging sensitive data)
  • Missing CSRF/CORS protections where applicable

3. Performance

  • N+1 query patterns
  • Unnecessary loops or redundant computations
  • Missing pagination for unbounded queries
  • Blocking operations in async contexts
  • Large memory allocations in hot paths
  • Missing indexes for new database queries

4. Test Coverage

  • Are new code paths covered by tests?
  • Are edge cases and error paths tested?
  • Are mocks appropriate and not over-mocking?
  • Do test names clearly describe the scenario?

5. Code Quality

  • Readability and naming clarity
  • Unnecessary complexity that can be simplified
  • Code duplication that should be extracted
  • Dead code or unused imports
  • Missing or misleading comments

6. Conventions

  • Adherence to project coding standards (check CLAUDE.md)
  • Consistent formatting and style
  • Proper commit message format
  • Documentation for public APIs

Output Format

Findings

Group findings by severity:

Critical (must fix before merge)
High (strongly recommend fixing)
Medium (should fix)
Low (nice to have)

Summary

Provide a 2-3 sentence executive summary of the PR quality.

Verdict

State one of:

  • GO — Ready to merge (no critical/high issues)
  • CONDITIONAL GO — Merge after addressing critical/high findings
  • NO-GO — Significant issues require rework before re-review

Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.

Reviews

No reviews yet — be the first.

Versions

  • v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.