feat: Initial agent-skills repo — 4 adapted skills for Mosaic Stack
Skills included: - pr-reviewer: Adapted for Gitea/GitHub via platform-aware scripts (dropped fetch_pr_data.py and add_inline_comment.py, kept generate_review_files.py) - code-review-excellence: Methodology and checklists (React, TS, Python, etc.) - vercel-react-best-practices: 57 rules for React/Next.js performance - tailwind-design-system: Tailwind CSS v4 patterns, CVA, design tokens New shell scripts added to ~/.claude/scripts/git/: - pr-diff.sh: Get PR diff (GitHub gh / Gitea API) - pr-metadata.sh: Get PR metadata as normalized JSON Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Jason Woltje
114
skills/code-review-excellence/assets/pr-review-template.md
Normal file
114
skills/code-review-excellence/assets/pr-review-template.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,114 @@
|
||||
# PR Review Template
|
||||
|
||||
Copy and use this template for your code reviews.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Summary
|
||||
|
||||
[Brief overview of what was reviewed - 1-2 sentences]
|
||||
|
||||
**PR Size:** [Small/Medium/Large] (~X lines)
|
||||
**Review Time:** [X minutes]
|
||||
|
||||
## Strengths
|
||||
|
||||
- [What was done well]
|
||||
- [Good patterns or approaches used]
|
||||
- [Improvements from previous code]
|
||||
|
||||
## Required Changes
|
||||
|
||||
🔴 **[blocking]** [Issue description]
|
||||
> [Code location or example]
|
||||
> [Suggested fix or explanation]
|
||||
|
||||
🔴 **[blocking]** [Issue description]
|
||||
> [Details]
|
||||
|
||||
## Important Suggestions
|
||||
|
||||
🟡 **[important]** [Issue description]
|
||||
> [Why this matters]
|
||||
> [Suggested approach]
|
||||
|
||||
## Minor Suggestions
|
||||
|
||||
🟢 **[nit]** [Minor improvement suggestion]
|
||||
|
||||
💡 **[suggestion]** [Alternative approach to consider]
|
||||
|
||||
## Questions
|
||||
|
||||
❓ [Clarification needed about X]
|
||||
|
||||
❓ [Question about design decision Y]
|
||||
|
||||
## Security Considerations
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] No hardcoded secrets
|
||||
- [ ] Input validation present
|
||||
- [ ] Authorization checks in place
|
||||
- [ ] No SQL/XSS injection risks
|
||||
|
||||
## Test Coverage
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Unit tests added/updated
|
||||
- [ ] Edge cases covered
|
||||
- [ ] Error cases tested
|
||||
|
||||
## Verdict
|
||||
|
||||
**[ ] ✅ Approve** - Ready to merge
|
||||
**[ ] 💬 Comment** - Minor suggestions, can merge
|
||||
**[ ] 🔄 Request Changes** - Must address blocking issues
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Copy Templates
|
||||
|
||||
### Blocking Issue
|
||||
```
|
||||
🔴 **[blocking]** [Title]
|
||||
|
||||
[Description of the issue]
|
||||
|
||||
**Location:** `file.ts:123`
|
||||
|
||||
**Suggested fix:**
|
||||
\`\`\`typescript
|
||||
// Your suggested code
|
||||
\`\`\`
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Important Suggestion
|
||||
```
|
||||
🟡 **[important]** [Title]
|
||||
|
||||
[Why this is important]
|
||||
|
||||
**Consider:**
|
||||
- Option A: [description]
|
||||
- Option B: [description]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Minor Suggestion
|
||||
```
|
||||
🟢 **[nit]** [Suggestion]
|
||||
|
||||
Not blocking, but consider [improvement].
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Praise
|
||||
```
|
||||
🎉 **[praise]** Great work on [specific thing]!
|
||||
|
||||
[Why this is good]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Question
|
||||
```
|
||||
❓ **[question]** [Your question]
|
||||
|
||||
I'm curious about the decision to [X]. Could you explain [Y]?
|
||||
```
|
||||
121
skills/code-review-excellence/assets/review-checklist.md
Normal file
121
skills/code-review-excellence/assets/review-checklist.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,121 @@
|
||||
# Code Review Quick Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
Quick reference checklist for code reviews.
|
||||
|
||||
## Pre-Review (2 min)
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Read PR description and linked issue
|
||||
- [ ] Check PR size (<400 lines ideal)
|
||||
- [ ] Verify CI/CD status (tests passing?)
|
||||
- [ ] Understand the business requirement
|
||||
|
||||
## Architecture & Design (5 min)
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Solution fits the problem
|
||||
- [ ] Consistent with existing patterns
|
||||
- [ ] No simpler approach exists
|
||||
- [ ] Will it scale?
|
||||
- [ ] Changes in right location
|
||||
|
||||
## Logic & Correctness (10 min)
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Edge cases handled
|
||||
- [ ] Null/undefined checks present
|
||||
- [ ] Off-by-one errors checked
|
||||
- [ ] Race conditions considered
|
||||
- [ ] Error handling complete
|
||||
- [ ] Correct data types used
|
||||
|
||||
## Security (5 min)
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] No hardcoded secrets
|
||||
- [ ] Input validated/sanitized
|
||||
- [ ] SQL injection prevented
|
||||
- [ ] XSS prevented
|
||||
- [ ] Authorization checks present
|
||||
- [ ] Sensitive data protected
|
||||
|
||||
## Performance (3 min)
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] No N+1 queries
|
||||
- [ ] Expensive operations optimized
|
||||
- [ ] Large lists paginated
|
||||
- [ ] No memory leaks
|
||||
- [ ] Caching considered where appropriate
|
||||
|
||||
## Testing (5 min)
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Tests exist for new code
|
||||
- [ ] Edge cases tested
|
||||
- [ ] Error cases tested
|
||||
- [ ] Tests are readable
|
||||
- [ ] Tests are deterministic
|
||||
|
||||
## Code Quality (3 min)
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Clear variable/function names
|
||||
- [ ] No code duplication
|
||||
- [ ] Functions do one thing
|
||||
- [ ] Complex code commented
|
||||
- [ ] No magic numbers
|
||||
|
||||
## Documentation (2 min)
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Public APIs documented
|
||||
- [ ] README updated if needed
|
||||
- [ ] Breaking changes noted
|
||||
- [ ] Complex logic explained
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Severity Labels
|
||||
|
||||
| Label | Meaning | Action |
|
||||
|-------|---------|--------|
|
||||
| 🔴 `[blocking]` | Must fix | Block merge |
|
||||
| 🟡 `[important]` | Should fix | Discuss if disagree |
|
||||
| 🟢 `[nit]` | Nice to have | Non-blocking |
|
||||
| 💡 `[suggestion]` | Alternative | Consider |
|
||||
| ❓ `[question]` | Need clarity | Respond |
|
||||
| 🎉 `[praise]` | Good work | Celebrate! |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Decision Matrix
|
||||
|
||||
| Situation | Decision |
|
||||
|-----------|----------|
|
||||
| Critical security issue | 🔴 Block, fix immediately |
|
||||
| Breaking change without migration | 🔴 Block |
|
||||
| Missing error handling | 🟡 Should fix |
|
||||
| No tests for new code | 🟡 Should fix |
|
||||
| Style preference | 🟢 Non-blocking |
|
||||
| Minor naming improvement | 🟢 Non-blocking |
|
||||
| Clever but working code | 💡 Suggest simpler |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Time Budget
|
||||
|
||||
| PR Size | Target Time |
|
||||
|---------|-------------|
|
||||
| < 100 lines | 10-15 min |
|
||||
| 100-400 lines | 20-40 min |
|
||||
| > 400 lines | Ask to split |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Red Flags
|
||||
|
||||
Watch for these patterns:
|
||||
|
||||
- `// TODO` in production code
|
||||
- `console.log` left in code
|
||||
- Commented out code
|
||||
- `any` type in TypeScript
|
||||
- Empty catch blocks
|
||||
- `unwrap()` in Rust production code
|
||||
- Magic numbers/strings
|
||||
- Copy-pasted code blocks
|
||||
- Missing null checks
|
||||
- Hardcoded URLs/credentials
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user