luongnv89/code-review

Code Review

One skill for reviewing and improving code quality. Pick a mode by intent (or pass an explicit mode: parameter); each mode is a full, self-contained workflow in references/. Load only the mode you need — this protects the agent's context budget.

Modes

| Mode | Use when the user wants to... | Reads / writes | Output | Workflow | |---|---|---|---|---| | review (default) | find bugs, security holes, quality issues in a diff/PR | read-only | prioritized findings report | references/review-mode.md | | perf | make code faster — bottlenecks, leaks, algorithmic waste | read-only | performance findings report | references/perf-mode.md | | clean | audit readability/standards vs the bbv Clean Code cheat sheet | read-only | CLEAN_CODE_AUDIT.md | references/clean-mode.md | | cleanup | actually refactor out AI slop, dead code, duplication, cruft | WRITES CODE | modified source files | references/cleanup-mode.md |

Selecting the mode

1. Explicit wins. If the request carries mode:review|perf|clean|cleanup (or --mode <name>), use it.
2. Otherwise infer from the request:
   • "review", "find bugs", "security", "is this correct", "look for vulnerabilities" → review
   • "slow", "faster", "optimize", "bottleneck", "memory leak", "performance" → perf
   • "clean code", "readability", "audit against standards", "clean-code audit" → clean
   • "remove slop", "clean up the codebase", "refactor out cruft / dead code / duplication" → cleanup
3. Ambiguous? Ask which mode, naming the options. Fall back to review only when the intent is clearly "review this" with no other signal.

Safety: cleanup writes code — the other three do not

review, perf, and clean are strictly read-only: they analyze and report, never touching source. cleanup modifies files. Therefore:

• Never enter cleanup by weak inference. Run it only when the user explicitly asks to refactor / clean up the codebase (or passes mode:cleanup). A plain "review my code" must never rewrite files — stay in a read-only mode.
• Confirm before the first write in cleanup, and follow that mode's own gating.

Repo Sync Before Edits

The router itself is read-only. The two modes that touch a git repo carry the mandatory sync-before-edits step in their own workflow: cleanup (writes source) in references/cleanup-mode.md and clean (writes CLEAN_CODE_AUDIT.md) in references/clean-mode.md. Before either mode edits, follow that reference's Repo Sync step — sync with remote (stash-first if the tree is dirty) so writes land on top of the latest base.

Run the mode's workflow

Read the selected mode's reference file and execute its steps exactly. Supporting files each mode uses (already colocated under this skill):

• review → references/review-mode.md — agents agents/reviewer.md, agents/file-reviewer.md, agents/report-assembler.md; refs references/subagent-architecture.md, references/code-smells.md
• perf → references/perf-mode.md — ref references/language-checks.md
• clean → references/clean-mode.md — refs references/clean-code-checklist.md, references/tdd-checklist.md, references/html-report-guide.md, references/report-template.html
• cleanup → references/cleanup-mode.md — the 8 cleaner agents in agents/ (deduplicator.md, type-consolidator.md, unused-code-killer.md, circular-dep-untangler.md, weak-type-strengthener.md, defensive-programming-remover.md, legacy-code-remover.md, slop-comment-cleaner.md)

Environment Check

If the Agent tool is available, modes that use subagents (review, cleanup) spawn them per their workflow — fresh-context validation and parallel work. If it is unavailable (e.g., Claude.ai), execute each mode's phases inline (less rigorous, but functional).

Chaining modes

Modes compose: a common flow is clean (audit → CLEAN_CODE_AUDIT.md) then cleanup (apply the refactors), or review/perf to find issues before fixing. Run one mode at a time; confirm with the user before switching into the code-writing cleanup mode.

Prerequisites

• Require a readable target diff, PR, file set, or repository; ask for scope when none is provided.
• Check that every reference and agent required by the selected mode is available before starting.
• For clean or cleanup, validate repository state and follow that mode's sync, backup, dry-run, confirmation, and rollback instructions. Stop on sync errors or failed safety checks.

Acceptance Criteria

Verify every run against the selected mode's own acceptance criteria, then assert all of these router criteria:

• Exactly one mode was selected and its reference workflow was followed end to end.
• Read-only modes changed no source files; verify with a path-scoped git diff when applicable.
• Every finding cites concrete evidence and the expected output artifact or report was produced.
• Tests or validation commands required by the selected mode completed with their expected result.
• Edge cases, limitations, skipped files, and degraded subagent coverage are disclosed.

Expected Output

Example response after a read-only review:

Mode: review
Result: PASS
Findings: 1 critical, 2 major, 0 minor
Output: CODE_REVIEW.md
Validation: reviewer pass complete; no source files changed

Step Completion Reports

After routing and after the selected workflow, emit a compact report:

◆ Code Review ([mode])
  Mode selection:      √ pass
  Workflow criteria:   √ pass
  Output verified:     √ pass
  Safety boundary:     √ pass
  Result:              PASS | FAIL | PARTIAL

Use × fail — reason for any unmet check. Never report PASS while a selected-mode acceptance criterion, expected output, required test, or safety guardrail is unresolved.

Edge Cases

• Unknown mode: value → reject it and list the four valid modes.
• Mixed intents across modes → ask which mode to run first; never merge workflows implicitly.
• Missing target or inaccessible files → stop and request a concrete scope instead of guessing.
• Agent tool unavailable → use the selected reference's inline fallback and disclose reduced coverage.
• A read-only mode requests edits mid-run → finish the report, then require explicit approval before starting a separate cleanup run.