enuno/review-merge-readiness
skills/ship-faster/skills/_archive/review-merge-readiness/SKILL.md
Request/execute structured code review: use after completing important tasks, at end of each execution batch, or before merge. Based on git diff range, compare against plan and requirements, output issue list by Critical/Important/Minor severity, and provide clear verdict on merge readiness. Trigger words: request code review, PR review, merge readiness, production readiness.
$ install --global
skillsauthnpx skillsauth add enuno/claude-command-and-control review-merge-readinessInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
Security Scan Results
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
3
Scanners Passed
9
Scanners in report
Clean
TrivyContainer and dependency vulnerability scanner
95%
Clean
SemgrepStatic code analysis for vulnerabilities
95%
Clean
mcp-scan (Snyk)Model Context Protocol security validation
95%
Skipped
Snyk (dep)Open source security scanning
50%
Skipped
Socket.devSupply chain security analysis
50%
Skipped
VirusTotalMulti-engine malware detection
50%
Skipped
CrowdStrikeAdvanced threat intelligence
50%
Skipped
OSV-ScannerOpen Source Vulnerability database check
50%
Skipped
OWASP Dep-Check
50%
Last scanned: Apr 4, 2026, 7:36 PM4.9s2 files scanned
SKILL.md
- name:
- review-merge-readiness
- description:
- Request/execute structured code review: use after completing important tasks, at end of each execution batch, or before merge. Based on git diff range, compare against plan and requirements, output issue list by Critical/Important/Minor severity, and provide clear verdict on merge readiness. Trigger words: request code review, PR review, merge readiness, production readiness.
Requesting Code Review (Structured Review: Requirements Alignment + Production Readiness)
Goal: Make code review a repeatable process, not random comments.
Core principle: Review early, review often.
When Review is Required
Mandatory:
- After completing important features
- After each batch in
workflow-execute-plansends (default 3 tasks per batch) - Before merging to main branch
Optional but valuable:
- When stuck (get a fresh perspective)
- Before major refactoring (establish baseline first)
- After fixing complex bugs (verify no new regressions)
How to Initiate (Minimum Information Set)
1) Determine Review Scope (git SHA)
Prefer using "baseline before plan/task started" as BASE_SHA:
# Common approach: use main as baseline
BASE_SHA=$(git merge-base HEAD main 2>/dev/null || git merge-base HEAD master)
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
If you want to review just the most recent commit within a small task:
BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1)
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
2) Prepare Review Basis (Plan / Requirements)
Review must provide:
- WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED: What you just completed (1-3 bullet points)
- PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Corresponding plan excerpt or requirements document path (e.g.,
run_dir/03-plans/features/<feature_slug>-plan.md)
3) Get diff (Evidence)
git diff --stat "$BASE_SHA..$HEAD_SHA"
git diff "$BASE_SHA..$HEAD_SHA"
Review Execution Methods (Choose One)
Method A: Sub-Agent Review (if your system supports it)
Use template: review-merge-readiness/code-reviewer.md, fill in placeholders and execute.
Method B: Self Review (works without sub-agent)
Check each item per template checklist and output same structured result (Strengths + Issues by severity + Verdict).
Review Output Format (Must Be Structured)
Output must include:
- Strengths: Specific positives (at least 1)
- Issues: Categorized by severity:
- Critical (Must Fix): Security/data loss/functionality bugs/would cause production incidents
- Important (Should Fix): Obviously poor architecture/missing error handling/test gaps/requirements misalignment
- Minor (Nice to Have): Style/small optimizations/documentation polish
- Assessment: Merge readiness (Yes/No/With fixes) + 1-2 sentence technical reasoning
Each Issue must include:
- Location:
file:line - What's wrong
- Why it matters
- How to fix (provide minimal change suggestion)
Relationship with Other Review Skills
review-clean-code: More focused on "maintainability/cleanliness", suitable for deep code smell investigationreview-react-best-practices: More focused on React/Next.js performance patterns (waterfalls/bundle/re-renders). Use when the diff touches React UI, data fetching, or performance-sensitive areas.- This skill: More focused on "requirements alignment/production readiness/merge verdict" conclusion-oriented review
If you just need a "can we merge?" verdict: use this skill.
If you want a deep health check: additionally invoke review-clean-code.
Related Skills
enuno/mempalace
tools
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
MemPalace local-first AI memory system. Use when setting up persistent memory for Claude Code sessions, mining project files or conversation transcripts, querying past context, configuring MCP tools, managing the knowledge graph, or troubleshooting palace operations.
12SKILL.mdUpdated May 26, 2026
enuno/langsmith
tools
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
LangSmith Python SDK — trace, evaluate, and monitor LLM applications. Covers @traceable decorator, trace context manager, Client API, evaluate() / aevaluate(), comparative evaluation, custom evaluators, dataset management, prompt caching, ASGI middleware, and pytest plugin.
12SKILL.mdUpdated May 26, 2026
enuno/langgraph
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
LangGraph (Python) — build stateful, controllable agent graphs with checkpointing, streaming, persistence, interrupts, fault tolerance, and durable execution. Covers both Graph API (StateGraph) and Functional API (@entrypoint/@task).
12SKILL.mdUpdated May 26, 2026
enuno/langgraph-graph-api
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
LangGraph Graph API (Python) — build explicit DAG agent workflows with StateGraph, typed state, nodes, edges, Command routing, Send fan-out, checkpointers, interrupts, and streaming. Use when you need explicit control flow and graph topology.
12SKILL.mdUpdated May 26, 2026