code-review
Review Code with Sentry Practices
Pull request reviews often miss risks across correctness, security, performance, and testing. This skill gives Claude, Codex, and Claude Code a structured Sentry review checklist.
Install with my Agent
Copy this request to your Agent. It includes the canonical Skill page and manifest.
Review the Skillstore skill "code-review" from https://skillstore.io/skills/getsentry-code-review.md and its manifest at https://skillstore.io/api/skills/getsentry-code-review/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 "code-review". Review a pull request that adds a billing workflow and database migration.
Expected outcome:
- Blocking: the migration may lock a large table during deploy.
- Blocking: failed payment retries need integration test coverage.
- Question: should support receive an alert when billing fails?
Using "code-review". Review a React change that loads user-specific project data.
Expected outcome:
- Blocking: the effect may use stale project identifiers.
- Non-blocking: add a loading state test for the project switcher.
- Suggestion: keep the comment focused on user-visible risk.
Using "code-review". Review a security-sensitive endpoint change.
Expected outcome:
- Blocking: confirm the endpoint enforces object-level access control.
- Blocking: add a regression test for unauthorized access.
- Escalation: request senior review before merging this change.
Security Audit
SafeThe static findings are false positives from markdown code fences, educational review examples, and a public documentation link. No prompt injection, data exfiltration intent, or executable behavior was found in SKILL.md.
Risk Factors
⚙️ External commands (5)
🌐 Network access (1)
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/getsentry-code-review/audits/7?utm_source=security_passport&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=versioned_reportMarkdown badge
[](https://skillstore.io/skills/getsentry-code-review?utm_source=security_passport_badge)HTML badge
<a href="https://skillstore.io/skills/getsentry-code-review?utm_source=security_passport_badge"><img src="https://skillstore.io/badges/skills/getsentry-code-review/security.svg" alt="Skillstore security assessment" loading="lazy"></a>Embed card
<iframe src="https://skillstore.io/embed/skills/getsentry-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>Academic citations (APA · BibTeX · CFF)
APA citation
getsentry. (2026). code-review security audit report (audit version 7) [Author version unspecified]. Skillstore. https://skillstore.io/skills/getsentry-code-review/audits/7BibTeX citation
@techreport{getsentry-getsentry-code-review-2026,
author = {getsentry},
title = {code-review security audit report (audit version 7)},
institution = {Skillstore},
year = {2026},
number = {7},
url = {https://skillstore.io/skills/getsentry-code-review/audits/7},
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-review security audit report (audit version 7)"
version: "unspecified"
type: report
authors:
- name: "getsentry"
date-released: "2026-07-06"
url: "https://skillstore.io/skills/getsentry-code-review/audits/7"
identifiers:
- type: other
value: "skillstore:getsentry-code-review:audit:7"
description: "Skillstore immutable audit report identifier"
Compare variants
14 installable variantsEach author remains a separate installable skill. The recommended variant is ranked by Skillstore evidence.
Why this variant is first
21pounder-code-review
2026-09-09
daviddworetzky-code-review
2026-09-09
bind-code-review
2026-09-09
adammanuel-dev-code-review
2026-09-09
getsentry-code-review
2026-09-09
davila7-code-review
2026-09-09
89jobrien-code-review
2026-09-09
supercent-io-code-review
2026-09-09
ancplua-code-review
2026-09-09
cain96-code-review
2026-09-09
doyajin174-code-review
2026-09-09
mattpocock-code-review
2026-09-09
ericdumingtong-code-review
2026-09-09
coderabbitai-code-review
2026-09-09
Skillstore Score
Why this score Evidence Confidence: HighWhat You Can Build
Review a pull request
Apply a structured checklist before approving changes that affect product behavior.
Assess risky architecture changes
Flag database, API, framework, and security-sensitive changes for deeper review.
Improve review consistency
Give teams a shared standard for feedback tone, test expectations, and blocking concerns.
Try These Prompts
Review this pull request for correctness, tests, security, and performance. Focus on issues that should block merge.
Review the changed tests and identify missing coverage for business logic, integrations, and critical user paths.
Review these changes for runtime errors, side effects, backwards compatibility, ORM performance, and security vulnerabilities.
Review this pull request and identify any database, API, framework, performance-critical, or security-sensitive changes needing senior review.
Best Practices
- Provide the diff, affected requirements, and test results with the prompt.
- Ask for blocking issues first, then non-blocking suggestions.
- Use project context to validate whether Sentry-specific guidance applies.
Avoid
- Do not use the skill as the only approval signal for risky changes.
- Do not request style-only feedback when the goal is risk reduction.
- Do not ignore failing tests or missing context in the review.