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.
使用我的智慧代理安裝
將此請求複製給你的智慧代理，其中包含權威 Skill 頁面和清單。
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.你的智慧代理仍應顯示其計畫，並依安全政策請求必要確認。
Agent 可讀資源
當 AI Agent、爬蟲或腳本需要乾淨脈絡、而不是讀取完整頁面時，請使用這些連結。
測試它
正在使用「gjalla-code-review」。 Review a change that adds payment retry behavior after request timeouts.
預期結果:
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.
預期結果:
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.
預期結果:
No Blocking or Should fix findings. The updated term is consistent throughout the provided diff. Not verified: references outside the supplied files.
安全審計
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.
風險因素
⚙️ 外部命令 (1)
分享與引用此報告
分享版本化評估報告、中性徽章、嵌入卡片與引用。Skillstore 只報告證據，不判斷該 Skill 是否安全。
複製報告連結
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>學術引用 (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 評分
評分依據 證據置信度: 中你可以打造什麼
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.
試試這些提示
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.
最佳實務
- 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.