skills/requesting-code-review/SKILL.md
Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements
npx skillsauth add lucianghinda/superpowers-ruby requesting-code-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.
Dispatch superpowers-ruby:code-reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade. The reviewer gets precisely crafted context for evaluation — never your session's history. This keeps the reviewer focused on the work product, not your thought process, and preserves your own context for continued work.
Core principle: Review early, review often.
Mandatory:
Optional but valuable:
1. Get git SHAs:
BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1) # or origin/main
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
2. Dispatch code-reviewer subagent:
Use Task tool with superpowers-ruby:code-reviewer type, fill template at code-reviewer.md
Placeholders:
{WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED} - What you just built{PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS} - What it should do{BASE_SHA} - Starting commit{HEAD_SHA} - Ending commit{DESCRIPTION} - Brief summary3. Act on feedback:
[Just completed Task 2: Add verification function]
You: Let me request code review before proceeding.
BASE_SHA=$(git log --oneline | grep "Task 1" | head -1 | awk '{print $1}')
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
[Dispatch superpowers-ruby:code-reviewer subagent]
WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED: Verification and repair functions for conversation index
PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from docs/superpowers/plans/deployment-plan.md
BASE_SHA: a7981ec
HEAD_SHA: 3df7661
DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types
[Subagent returns]:
Strengths: Clean architecture, real tests
Issues:
Important: Missing progress indicators
Minor: Magic number (100) for reporting interval
Assessment: Ready to proceed
You: [Fix progress indicators]
[Continue to Task 3]
Subagent-Driven Development:
Executing Plans:
Ad-Hoc Development:
Never:
If reviewer wrong:
See template at: requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md
development
Use when writing, reviewing, or debugging pure Ruby code — idiomatic patterns, modern 3.x+ features (pattern matching, Data.define, endless methods), error handling conventions (raise vs fail, result objects), memoization, and performance idioms. For Rails use rails-guides. For testing use minitest. For code style use sandi-metz-rules.
testing
Official Rails documentation. Use when asked about any Rails-specific topic including ActiveRecord, routing, controllers, views, mailers, jobs, Action Cable, Action Text, Active Storage, migrations, validations, callbacks, associations, caching, security, or internals.
tools
--- name: ruby-upgrade description: Use when upgrading the Ruby interpreter version of a Bundler/Rails app — especially "upgrade to Ruby 4", "bump Ruby to 4.0", "audit Ruby 4 compatibility", "what breaks on Ruby 4", or a specific target like "Ruby 4.0.5". Triggers on Ruby-major risk symptoms: CGI.parse/CGI::Cookie removal, Net::HTTP implicit Content-Type dropped, demoted default gems (ostruct/logger/benchmark/irb), SortedSet, Set#inspect changes, native-extension recompile crashes, openssl 4 pin
development
Use when stuck after multiple debug attempts and want to escalate to a stronger one-shot model (GPT-5 Pro, Opus, Gemini Pro) — packages a self-contained "oracle prompt" with Ruby/Rails project briefing, verbatim error, what-was-tried, constraints, and just-enough attached files. Triggers include "ask the oracle", "write a letter to GPT-5", "I'm stuck, draft a prompt for another model", "/tmp/letter.md".