reviewing-code
Review Code Changes with Structured Feedback
Code reviews can miss risks when feedback is unstructured. This skill gives Claude, Codex, and Claude Code a repeatable review checklist and verdict format.
Install with my Agent
Copy this request to your Agent. It includes the canonical Skill page and manifest.
Review the Skillstore skill "reviewing-code" from https://skillstore.io/skills/bpsai-reviewing-code.md and its manifest at https://skillstore.io/api/skills/bpsai-reviewing-code/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.
Test it
Using "reviewing-code". A pull request adds GitHub API integration without tests for failed responses.
Expected outcome:
Must fix: add failure-path tests for API errors. Should fix: document retry behavior. Verdict: request changes.
Using "reviewing-code". A branch refactors utility functions and adds type hints.
Expected outcome:
Summary: the refactor is clear and covered by tests. Consider adding docstrings for public helpers. Verdict: approve with comments.
Using "reviewing-code". A change introduces configuration values directly inside application logic.
Expected outcome:
Must fix: move hardcoded values into configuration. Should fix: add tests for missing configuration. Verdict: request changes.
Security Audit
SafeMost static findings are false positives caused by Markdown code fences, not Ruby or shell backtick execution. One command pattern uses xargs over changed filenames and should be made safer before broad publication.
Capability review items (1)
These are real local capabilities that may be expected for this skill, so they require review but are not counted as confirmed malicious behavior.
Risk Factors
⚙️ External commands (6)
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.
Copy report link
https://skillstore.io/skills/bpsai-reviewing-code/audits/11?utm_source=security_passport&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=versioned_reportMarkdown badge
[](https://skillstore.io/skills/bpsai-reviewing-code?utm_source=security_passport_badge)HTML badge
<a href="https://skillstore.io/skills/bpsai-reviewing-code?utm_source=security_passport_badge"><img src="https://skillstore.io/badges/skills/bpsai-reviewing-code/security.svg" alt="Skillstore security assessment" loading="lazy"></a>Embed card
<iframe src="https://skillstore.io/embed/skills/bpsai-reviewing-code.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
BPSAI. (2026). reviewing-code security audit report (audit version 11) [Author version unspecified]. Skillstore. https://skillstore.io/skills/bpsai-reviewing-code/audits/11BibTeX citation
@techreport{bpsai-bpsai-reviewing-code-2026,
author = {BPSAI},
title = {reviewing-code security audit report (audit version 11)},
institution = {Skillstore},
year = {2026},
number = {11},
url = {https://skillstore.io/skills/bpsai-reviewing-code/audits/11},
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: "reviewing-code security audit report (audit version 11)"
version: "unspecified"
type: report
authors:
- name: "BPSAI"
date-released: "2026-07-09"
url: "https://skillstore.io/skills/bpsai-reviewing-code/audits/11"
identifiers:
- type: other
value: "skillstore:bpsai-reviewing-code:audit:11"
description: "Skillstore immutable audit report identifier"
Skillstore Score
Why this score Evidence Confidence: HighWhat You Can Build
Pull Request Review
Review a change set with required fixes, suggestions, positive notes, and an approval recommendation.
Quality Gate Check
Check whether a branch includes tests, documentation, type hints, and project-specific safeguards.
Pre-Submit Self Review
Run a structured pass before requesting review so common issues are resolved earlier.
Try These Prompts
Review my current code changes. Summarize the impact, list must-fix issues, and give an approval verdict.
Review this pull request against the skill checklist. Separate must-fix issues, should-fix items, optional improvements, and positive notes.
Review this branch for release readiness. Focus on tests, configuration, external service mocking, secrets, and maintainability.
Review the design and implementation risks in this change. Identify behavioral regressions, missing safeguards, and long-term maintenance concerns.
Best Practices
- Run the relevant checks before asking for a final review verdict.
- Review the diff and surrounding code before writing findings.
- Keep feedback specific, actionable, and tied to file locations when possible.
Avoid
- Approving changes before tests, linting, or project checks are considered.
- Mixing optional preferences with required correctness or security fixes.
- Reporting generic issues without evidence from the changed code.