Skills code-reviewer

📦

code-reviewer

Name: code-reviewer
Author: AutumnsGrove

Content revision r3 Safe ⚡ Contains scripts⚙️ External commands🌐 Network access📁 Filesystem access🔑 Env variables

Review Code for Security, Quality, and Performance

Manual reviews can miss security, quality, and performance issues. This skill applies a structured workflow and optional analysis tools to produce prioritized feedback.

Supports: Claude Codex Code(CC)

🥇 83 Gold

Install with my Agent

Copy this request to your Agent. It includes the canonical Skill page and manifest.

Agent request

Review the Skillstore skill "code-reviewer" from https://skillstore.io/skills/autumnsgrove-code-reviewer.md and its manifest at https://skillstore.io/api/skills/autumnsgrove-code-reviewer/manifest. Verify the artifact. You may proceed after verification, subject to the environment's own policy.

Your Agent should still show its plan and request any confirmation required by the security policy.

Agent-readable resources

Use these links when an AI agent, crawler, or script needs clean context instead of reading the full page.

Markdown detail GET /skills/autumnsgrove-code-reviewer.md Signed manifest GET /api/skills/autumnsgrove-code-reviewer/manifest Signed lockfile GET /api/skills/autumnsgrove-code-reviewer/lockfile

Test it

Using "code-reviewer". Review a login handler that builds a database query from request fields.

Expected outcome:

Critical: User input reaches the query without parameterization, enabling SQL injection.
Fix: Use bound parameters and add tests with malicious input.

Using "code-reviewer". Review a data-processing function with nested loops and no edge-case tests.

Expected outcome:

High: Repeated linear searches create quadratic runtime for large inputs.
Medium: Empty and duplicate inputs lack test coverage.

Using "code-reviewer". Review a small documentation-only pull request.

Expected outcome:

No blocking issues found. Verify referenced commands and links during continuous integration.

Security Audit

Safe

v15 • 7/23/2026 Open versioned report

All 111 static alerts are false positives from educational examples, Markdown syntax, or expected helper behavior. The helper runs fixed local analyzers with argument lists and never enables shell execution. It writes reports only to a user-selected path, and no malicious intent or prompt injection was found.

Files scanned

2,635

Lines analyzed

Review items

False positives ignored

Risk Factors

⚡ Contains scripts (7)

examples/security_patterns.md:62 examples/security_patterns.md:86 examples/security_patterns.md:471 examples/security_patterns.md:86 examples/security_patterns.md:415 examples/security_patterns.md:438 examples/security_patterns.md:63

⚙️ External commands (34)

🌐 Network access (12)

examples/security_patterns.md:247 examples/security_patterns.md:378 examples/security_patterns.md:385 examples/security_patterns.md:450 examples/security_patterns.md:454 examples/security_patterns.md:355 references/performance_guide.md:294 references/performance_guide.md:319 references/performance_guide.md:332 references/performance_guide.md:338 references/performance_guide.md:332 references/performance_guide.md:339

📁 Filesystem access (3)

examples/security_patterns.md:97 examples/security_patterns.md:299 scripts/review_helper.py:403

🔑 Env variables (14)

examples/security_patterns.md:239 examples/security_patterns.md:240 examples/security_patterns.md:345 examples/security_patterns.md:228 examples/security_patterns.md:240 examples/security_patterns.md:227 examples/security_patterns.md:232 examples/security_patterns.md:239 examples/security_patterns.md:248 examples/security_patterns.md:490 examples/security_patterns.md:492 examples/security_patterns.md:495 examples/security_patterns.md:498 examples/security_patterns.md:524

No confirmed security findings were detected by the latest completed static and semantic audit. This does not prove the skill has no side effects.

Audited by: codex View Audit History →

Share & cite this report

Share the versioned assessment report, neutral badge, embed card, and citations. Skillstore reports evidence without deciding whether this Skill is safe.

Open versioned report

Copy report link

https://skillstore.io/skills/autumnsgrove-code-reviewer/audits/15?utm_source=security_passport&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=versioned_report

Markdown badge

[![Skillstore security assessment](https://skillstore.io/badges/skills/autumnsgrove-code-reviewer/security.svg)](https://skillstore.io/skills/autumnsgrove-code-reviewer?utm_source=security_passport_badge)

HTML badge

<a href="https://skillstore.io/skills/autumnsgrove-code-reviewer?utm_source=security_passport_badge"><img src="https://skillstore.io/badges/skills/autumnsgrove-code-reviewer/security.svg" alt="Skillstore security assessment" loading="lazy"></a>

Embed card

<iframe src="https://skillstore.io/embed/skills/autumnsgrove-code-reviewer.html" title="Skillstore Security Assessment" sandbox="allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox" loading="lazy" referrerpolicy="no-referrer" width="420" height="180"></iframe>

Academic citations (APA · BibTeX · CFF)

APA citation

AutumnsGrove. (2026). code-reviewer security audit report (audit version 15) [Author version unspecified]. Skillstore. https://skillstore.io/skills/autumnsgrove-code-reviewer/audits/15

BibTeX citation

@techreport{autumnsgrove-autumnsgrove-code-reviewer-2026,
  author = {AutumnsGrove},
  title = {code-reviewer security audit report (audit version 15)},
  institution = {Skillstore},
  year = {2026},
  number = {15},
  url = {https://skillstore.io/skills/autumnsgrove-code-reviewer/audits/15},
  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: "code-reviewer security audit report (audit version 15)"
version: "unspecified"
type: report
authors:
  - name: "AutumnsGrove"
date-released: "2026-07-23"
url: "https://skillstore.io/skills/autumnsgrove-code-reviewer/audits/15"
identifiers:
  - type: other
    value: "skillstore:autumnsgrove-code-reviewer:audit:15"
    description: "Skillstore immutable audit report identifier"

Compare variants

9 installable variants

Each author remains a separate installable skill. The recommended variant is ranked by Skillstore evidence.

Why this variant is first

Higher Skillstore usage

Author / source Skillstore Score Evidence Confidence Skillstore usage Updated

alirezarezvani Recommended

alirezarezvani-code-reviewer

Skillstore Score 83

Evidence Confidence High

Skillstore usage 368

Updated

2026-08-21

AutumnsGrove Current

autumnsgrove-code-reviewer

Skillstore Score 83

Evidence Confidence High

Skillstore usage 77

Updated

2026-08-21

davila7

davila7-code-reviewer

Skillstore Score 81

Evidence Confidence High

Skillstore usage 13

Updated

2026-08-21

CuriousLearner

curiouslearner-code-reviewer

Skillstore Score 78

Evidence Confidence High

Skillstore usage 47

Updated

2026-08-21

sickn33

sickn33-code-reviewer

Skillstore Score 78

Evidence Confidence High

Skillstore usage 18

Updated

2026-08-21

9tykeshav

9tykeshav-code-reviewer

Skillstore Score 78

Evidence Confidence High

Skillstore usage 15

Updated

2026-08-21

DennisLiuCk

dennisliuck-code-reviewer

Skillstore Score 78

Evidence Confidence High

Skillstore usage 14

Updated

2026-08-21

google-gemini

google-gemini-code-reviewer

Skillstore Score 78

Evidence Confidence High

Skillstore usage 11

Updated

2026-08-21

shubhamsaboo

shubhamsaboo-code-reviewer

Skillstore Score 77

Evidence Confidence Medium

Skillstore usage 6

Updated

2026-08-21

Skillstore Score

Why this score Evidence Confidence: High

Architecture

Maintainability

Content

Community

Spec Compliance

What You Can Build

Review a pull request

Prioritize correctness, security, tests, maintainability, and actionable feedback before approval.

Prepare a release audit

Check a codebase for high-impact security, performance, dependency, and deployment risks.

Build review standards

Adapt the included workflow and checklist into consistent team review criteria.

Try These Prompts

Quick code review

Review [file or change]. List correctness, security, and maintainability issues by severity. Explain each issue and suggest a specific fix.

Security-focused review

Review [code or directory] for injection, access control, secret exposure, unsafe deserialization, and weak cryptography. Cite evidence and recommend mitigations.

Pull request assessment

Review [pull request] against its stated goals. Evaluate architecture, performance, tests, documentation, compatibility, and security. Separate blockers from improvements.

Advanced risk review

Threat-model [change], inspect trust boundaries and failure modes, then assess complexity and performance. Rank findings by impact, exploitability, confidence, and remediation effort.

Best Practices

Provide the change goals, affected files, runtime constraints, and project standards.
Ask for file and line evidence with clear severity and confidence.
Run relevant tests and analyzers, then verify important findings manually.

Avoid

Do not request a broad review without defining scope or expected behavior.
Do not treat automated scanner output as proof without checking code context.
Do not prioritize formatting feedback above correctness, security, or data integrity.