skills/review/SKILL.md
# /review — Composite Code Review Run the appropriate reviewer agents based on the mode and stack. ## Usage - `/review plan` — Review a plan/feature description before coding. Produces a requirements checklist. - `/review code` — Review actual code changes. Produces a violation report. - `/review code backend` — Limit code review to backend reviewers only. - `/review code frontend` — Limit code review to frontend reviewers only. ## Mode: `plan` **When**: Before coding starts. The user has a
npx skillsauth add litisaude/garage skills/reviewInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Run the appropriate reviewer agents based on the mode and stack.
/review plan — Review a plan/feature description before coding. Produces a requirements checklist./review code — Review actual code changes. Produces a violation report./review code backend — Limit code review to backend reviewers only./review code frontend — Limit code review to frontend reviewers only.planWhen: Before coding starts. The user has a feature description or plan draft.
What it does: Launches three agents in parallel — one for engineering standards (@agents/plan-requirements-reviewer.md), one for business/product readiness (@agents/business-readiness-reviewer.md), and one for security & threat modeling (@agents/security-threat-modeling-reviewer.md). Together they produce a comprehensive review covering technical requirements, business blind spots, and design-level security gaps. No code scanning.
Behavior:
subagent_type: "general-purpose":
@agents/plan-requirements-reviewer.md (engineering standards)@agents/business-readiness-reviewer.md (business/product readiness)@agents/security-threat-modeling-reviewer.md (security & threat modeling)codeWhen: After coding. The user has made changes and wants them reviewed.
What it does: Launches specialized reviewer agents in parallel to scan actual code for violations.
Behavior:
Determine scope: Look at the files the user wants reviewed. If no files are specified, use recent git changes (git diff --name-only HEAD~1).
Detect stack (if not explicitly provided):
.py, .go, .java, .rs files, models/, api/, services/, domains/, background_jobs/.tsx, .jsx, .ts, .js, .swift, .kt, .dart files, components/, screens/, pages/, hooks/Launch reviewers in parallel using the Task tool with subagent_type: "general-purpose":
For backend code, launch three parallel agents:
@agents/production-hardening-reviewer.md scoped to the target files@agents/audit-compliance-reviewer.md scoped to the target files@agents/security-controls-reviewer.md scoped to the target backend files (backend pillars only)For frontend/mobile code, launch three parallel agents:
@agents/production-hardening-reviewer.md scoped to the target frontend files (frontend pillars only — kill switch, client resilience)@agents/analytics-coverage-reviewer.md scoped to the target files@agents/security-controls-reviewer.md scoped to the target frontend files (frontend pillars only)For mixed stack, launch all four agents — a single production-hardening invocation covering both stacks, audit-compliance, analytics-coverage, and a single security-controls-reviewer invocation that covers both backend and frontend pillars across the full file scope.
Merge results: Combine the outputs from all agents into a single report.
# Plan Review: [Feature Name]
## Stack: [Backend / Frontend / Full Stack]
## Engineering Requirements
### [Category]
- ⚠️ **[Requirement]**: Why it applies and what the plan should specify
- ✅ **[Requirement]**: Already addressed in the plan
## Business & Product Readiness
### [Pillar Name]
- ⚠️ **[Requirement]**: Why it applies and what the plan should specify
- ✅ **[Requirement]**: Already addressed in the plan
## Security & Threat Model
### [Pillar Name]
- ⚠️ **[Requirement]**: Why it applies and what the plan should specify
- ✅ **[Requirement]**: Already addressed in the plan
## Summary
- **Engineering gaps**: N items
- **Business/product gaps**: N items
- **Security gaps**: N items
- **Already covered**: N items
# Code Review Report
## Stack: [Backend / Frontend / Full Stack]
## Files reviewed: [list or summary]
---
## Production Hardening
[Output from production-hardening-reviewer]
---
## Audit Compliance
[Output from audit-compliance-reviewer]
---
## Security Controls
[Output from security-controls-reviewer]
---
## Analytics Coverage
[Output from analytics-coverage-reviewer]
---
## Summary
- **Critical**: N findings
- **High**: N findings
- **Medium**: N findings
- **Low**: N findings
development
Generate a "visual companion" for one or more PRD/TRD markdown files. Long specs become a multi-page mini-site with a sticky side menu (folder of self-contained HTML files); short specs become a single-page HTML. Both follow the Liti mobile design system and a fixed page-shell template so visuals stay consistent across the team.
development
Maintainer-only workflow for handling GitHub Secret Scanning alerts on OpenClaw. Use when Codex needs to triage, redact, clean up, and resolve secret leakage found in issue comments, issue bodies, PR comments, or other GitHub content.
development
Maintainer workflow for OpenClaw releases, prereleases, changelog release notes, and publish validation. Use when Codex needs to prepare or verify stable or beta release steps, align version naming, assemble release notes, check release auth requirements, or validate publish-time commands and artifacts.
development
Run, watch, debug, and extend OpenClaw QA testing with qa-lab and qa-channel. Use when Codex needs to execute the repo-backed QA suite, inspect live QA artifacts, debug failing scenarios, add new QA scenarios, or explain the OpenClaw QA workflow. Prefer the live OpenAI lane with regular openai/gpt-5.4 in fast mode; do not use gpt-5.4-pro or gpt-5.4-mini unless the user explicitly overrides that policy.