receiving-code-review
Evaluate Code Review Feedback Rigorously
Code review feedback can be unclear, incomplete, or wrong for the current codebase. This skill helps Claude, Codex, and Claude Code verify, prioritize, and respond with technical rigor.
Install with my Agent
Copy this request to your Agent. It includes the canonical Skill page and manifest.
Review the Skillstore skill "receiving-code-review" from https://skillstore.io/skills/sickn33-receiving-code-review.md and its manifest at https://skillstore.io/api/skills/sickn33-receiving-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 "receiving-code-review". A reviewer says to remove a compatibility path, but the supported platform range is unclear.
Expected outcome:
- Checks the deployment target and API support before changing code.
- If compatibility is required, drafts a concise pushback with the evidence needed.
- If compatibility is not required, recommends removing the path and testing the affected flow.
Using "receiving-code-review". A review lists six requested fixes, but two items are vague.
Expected outcome:
- Identifies the four clear items and the two unclear items.
- Recommends asking for clarification before partial implementation.
- Explains that related review items can conflict when handled separately.
Using "receiving-code-review". A reviewer asks for metrics tracking, exports, and filters on an endpoint with no known callers.
Expected outcome:
- Recommends checking real usage before adding the feature.
- Flags unnecessary scope if the endpoint is unused.
- Suggests asking whether to remove the endpoint or confirm hidden usage.
Security Audit
SafeAll 24 external command detections are Markdown fences or inline examples, not executable backtick code. The network reconnaissance blocker points to prose about technical reasoning, and no prompt injection or malicious intent was found.
Risk Factors
⚙️ External commands (24)
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/sickn33-receiving-code-review/audits/4?utm_source=security_passport&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=versioned_reportMarkdown badge
[](https://skillstore.io/skills/sickn33-receiving-code-review?utm_source=security_passport_badge)HTML badge
<a href="https://skillstore.io/skills/sickn33-receiving-code-review?utm_source=security_passport_badge"><img src="https://skillstore.io/badges/skills/sickn33-receiving-code-review/security.svg" alt="Skillstore security assessment" loading="lazy"></a>Embed card
<iframe src="https://skillstore.io/embed/skills/sickn33-receiving-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
sickn33. (2026). receiving-code-review security audit report (audit version 4) [Author version unspecified]. Skillstore. https://skillstore.io/skills/sickn33-receiving-code-review/audits/4BibTeX citation
@techreport{sickn33-sickn33-receiving-code-review-2026,
author = {sickn33},
title = {receiving-code-review security audit report (audit version 4)},
institution = {Skillstore},
year = {2026},
number = {4},
url = {https://skillstore.io/skills/sickn33-receiving-code-review/audits/4},
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: "receiving-code-review security audit report (audit version 4)"
version: "unspecified"
type: report
authors:
- name: "sickn33"
date-released: "2026-07-07"
url: "https://skillstore.io/skills/sickn33-receiving-code-review/audits/4"
identifiers:
- type: other
value: "skillstore:sickn33-receiving-code-review:audit:4"
description: "Skillstore immutable audit report identifier"
Compare variants
8 installable variantsEach author remains a separate installable skill. The recommended variant is ranked by Skillstore evidence.
Why this variant is first
sickn33-receiving-code-review
2026-08-21
codingcossack-receiving-code-review
2026-08-21
zhanlincui-receiving-code-review
2026-08-21
obra-receiving-code-review
2026-08-21
cycleaddict-receiving-code-review
2026-08-21
davila7-receiving-code-review
2026-08-21
cygnusfear-receiving-code-review
2026-08-21
dyai2025-receiving-code-review
2026-08-21
Skillstore Score
Why this score Evidence Confidence: HighWhat You Can Build
Handle Ambiguous Review Feedback
Separate clear requests from unclear items before changing code, then ask focused clarification questions.
Verify External Reviewer Suggestions
Check whether a suggested change fits the current codebase, platform support, and existing behavior.
Coordinate Review Fixes
Prioritize blocking issues, simple fixes, and complex refactors while testing each change separately.
Try These Prompts
Help me evaluate this code review comment before I act: [paste comment]. Restate the technical request, list checks I should make, and identify clarification questions.
Review these numbered feedback items: [paste list]. Separate clear items from unclear ones, flag risky assumptions, and propose an implementation order.
A reviewer asked for a larger refactor: [paste request]. Compare it with current codebase constraints, identify unnecessary scope risks, and draft a concise response.
Evaluate this disputed review thread: [paste context]. Build a technical argument with evidence needed, tests to run, and a final reply recommendation.
Best Practices
- Read all review items before changing code.
- Verify each suggestion against current behavior, tests, and platform constraints.
- Implement one item at a time and test each change.
Avoid
- Accepting every review comment without checking it.
- Starting partial fixes while some requested items remain unclear.
- Using performative agreement instead of concise technical status.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is this skill only for pull requests?
Will it reject reviewer feedback automatically?
Can it help write GitHub review replies?
Does it replace tests?
Why does it discourage gratitude-heavy replies?
Which tools support this skill?
Developer Details
Author
sickn33License
MIT
Skillstore revision
r1
Version notice
The author did not declare a version.
Repository
https://github.com/sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills/tree/main/skills/receiving-code-reviewRef
9f814fc6a43fd99946f2da5e0df231c65a38bc76
Maintenance freshness
7/18/2026
Usage
11 downloads · 140 views
File structure
📄 SKILL.md