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.
使用我的智能体安装
将此请求复制给你的智能体，其中包含权威 Skill 页面和清单。
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.你的智能体仍应展示其计划，并按安全策略请求必要确认。
Agent 可读资源
当 AI Agent、爬虫或脚本需要干净上下文，而不是读取完整页面时，请使用这些链接。
测试它
正在使用“gjalla-code-review”。 Review a change that adds payment retry behavior after request timeouts.
预期结果:
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.
正在使用“gjalla-code-review”。 Review a pull request that introduces a shared cache for user preferences.
预期结果:
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.
正在使用“gjalla-code-review”。 Review a focused documentation-only naming correction.
预期结果:
No Blocking or Should fix findings. The updated term is consistent throughout the provided diff. Not verified: references outside the supplied files.
安全审计
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.
风险因素
⚙️ 外部命令 (1)
分享与引用此报告
分享版本化评估报告、中性徽章、嵌入卡片和引用。Skillstore 只报告证据，不判断该 Skill 是否安全。
复制报告链接
https://skillstore.io/skills/gjalla-gjalla-code-review/audits/1?utm_source=security_passport&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=versioned_reportMarkdown 徽章
[](https://skillstore.io/skills/gjalla-gjalla-code-review?utm_source=security_passport_badge)HTML 徽章
<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>嵌入卡片
<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>学术引用 (APA · BibTeX · CFF)
APA 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 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 评分
评分依据 证据置信度: 中你能构建什么
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.
试试这些提示
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.
最佳实践
- 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.
避免
- 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.