gjalla-code-review
Review Code Changes Before Merge
Code changes can hide correctness, security, and maintainability issues before merge. This skill reviews diffs from relevant perspectives and returns prioritized, location-specific fixes.
自分のエージェントでインストール
このリクエストをエージェントにコピーしてください。正規の Skill ページとマニフェストが含まれています。
Review the Skillstore skill "gjalla-code-review" from https://skillstore.io/skills/gjalla-gjalla-code-review.md and its manifest at https://skillstore.io/api/skills/gjalla-gjalla-code-review/manifest. Verify the artifact. You may proceed after verification, subject to the environment's own policy.エージェントは引き続き計画を提示し、セキュリティポリシーで必要な確認を求める必要があります。
エージェントが読めるリソース
AI エージェント、クローラー、スクリプトがページ全体ではなく整理されたコンテキストを必要とする場合は、これらのリンクを使ってください。
テストする
「gjalla-code-review」を使用しています。 Review a change that adds payment retry behavior after request timeouts.
期待される結果:
Blocking — [changed file]:[line]. The retry path can submit a payment twice after a timeout. Add idempotency and test timeout recovery. Not verified: integration tests.
「gjalla-code-review」を使用しています。 Review a pull request that introduces a shared cache for user preferences.
期待される結果:
Should fix — [changed file]:[line]. The cache key does not include the user identifier, so preferences can cross accounts. Scope keys per user and add isolation tests.
「gjalla-code-review」を使用しています。 Review a focused documentation-only naming correction.
期待される結果:
No Blocking or Should fix findings. The updated term is consistent throughout the provided diff. Not verified: references outside the supplied files.
セキュリティ監査
安全The only static finding is a false positive: line 23 uses Markdown backticks to format `file:line` in prose. SKILL.md contains review guidance only, with no executable code, command invocation, or semantic threat identified.
リスク要因
⚙️ 外部コマンド (1)
このレポートを共有・引用
バージョン付き評価レポート、中立的なバッジ、埋め込みカード、引用を共有できます。Skillstore は証拠を報告しますが、この Skill が安全かどうかは判断しません。
レポートリンクをコピー
https://skillstore.io/skills/gjalla-gjalla-code-review/audits/1?utm_source=security_passport&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=versioned_reportMarkdownバッジ
[](https://skillstore.io/skills/gjalla-gjalla-code-review?utm_source=security_passport_badge)HTMLバッジ
<a href="https://skillstore.io/skills/gjalla-gjalla-code-review?utm_source=security_passport_badge"><img src="https://skillstore.io/badges/skills/gjalla-gjalla-code-review/security.svg" alt="Skillstore security assessment" loading="lazy"></a>埋め込みカード
<iframe src="https://skillstore.io/embed/skills/gjalla-gjalla-code-review.html" title="Skillstore Security Assessment" sandbox="allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox" loading="lazy" referrerpolicy="no-referrer" width="420" height="180"></iframe>学術引用 (APA · BibTeX · CFF)
APA形式の引用
gjalla. (2026). gjalla-code-review security audit report (audit version 1) [Author version unspecified]. Skillstore. https://skillstore.io/skills/gjalla-gjalla-code-review/audits/1BibTeX形式の引用
@techreport{gjalla-gjalla-gjalla-code-review-2026,
author = {gjalla},
title = {gjalla-code-review security audit report (audit version 1)},
institution = {Skillstore},
year = {2026},
number = {1},
url = {https://skillstore.io/skills/gjalla-gjalla-code-review/audits/1},
note = {Author version unspecified}
}CITATION.cff
cff-version: 1.2.0
message: "If you use this Skill, cite its author and this versioned security audit report."
title: "gjalla-code-review security audit report (audit version 1)"
version: "unspecified"
type: report
authors:
- name: "gjalla"
date-released: "2026-08-11"
url: "https://skillstore.io/skills/gjalla-gjalla-code-review/audits/1"
identifiers:
- type: other
value: "skillstore:gjalla-gjalla-code-review:audit:1"
description: "Skillstore immutable audit report identifier"
Skillstore スコア
このスコアの理由 証拠の信頼度: 中作成できるもの
Review Before Opening a Pull Request
Find blocking defects and missing tests before requesting review from teammates.
Assess Merge Readiness
Prioritize actionable findings and decide whether a pull request is ready to merge.
Evaluate Product and Quality Impact
Examine user impact, acceptance criteria, failure modes, and maintainability across a proposed change.
これらのプロンプトを試す
Review this diff for merge readiness. Group findings as Blocking, Should fix, or Nit. Include location, problem, fix, and verification limits.
Review this pull request against its description and acceptance criteria. Focus on correctness, edge cases, tests, and maintainability. Prioritize actionable findings with locations.
Review this change from engineering, product, quality, and security perspectives where relevant. Identify second-order effects and missing handling. Explain merge risk and fixes.
Perform an adversarial ship-readiness review of this diff and linked specification. Trace data access, failure modes, compatibility, and user impact. Report only defensible findings.
ベストプラクティス
- Provide the full diff, change intent, acceptance criteria, and relevant specifications.
- Include test results and known constraints so findings can distinguish verified behavior from assumptions.
- Resolve Blocking findings first, then evaluate Should fix items within the release context.
回避
- Do not request approval from a partial diff that omits related changes.
- Do not treat automated review as a substitute for tests or accountable human review.
- Do not dismiss findings without checking the cited location, impact, and suggested fix.