Code Review

Use this skill when the task is to evaluate code rather than to implement changes immediately.

Goal

Produce a review that mirrors Codex's built-in review behavior:

What To Inspect

Review with the following order of attention:

  1. Correctness and broken behavior
  2. Regressions versus prior behavior
  3. Edge cases and unsafe assumptions
  4. Compatibility or integration risks
  5. Missing, weak, or misleading tests
  6. Maintainability issues only when they create real risk

Do not spend most of the review on style nits unless the user explicitly asks for style review. Do not drift into implementation unless the user also asks for changes.

Review Workflow

  1. Identify the review scope.
    • Current working tree, staged changes, a commit, a diff, a branch, or a specific file set.
    • If the scope is ambiguous but one reasonable default exists, use it and state the assumption.
  2. Read the relevant diff before reading large amounts of surrounding code.
  3. Open only the files needed to validate suspicious changes, call sites, and tests.
  4. Look for behavior changes, not just syntax issues.
  5. Check whether tests cover the changed paths and important failure modes.
  6. Stop once the highest-signal findings are supported by evidence.

Default Scope Assumptions

When the user does not specify scope, prefer these defaults:

  1. Review the latest local changes when the conversation is already about a recent edit.
  2. Review the latest commit when the user says latest commit or similar.
  3. Review the current diff or working tree when the user says review this with no other detail.

State the assumption briefly instead of blocking on a question unless the ambiguity is materially risky.

Findings Bar

Only raise a finding when all of the following are true:

Prefer fewer high-confidence findings over many speculative comments. Do not pad the review with weak observations just to make the review feel substantial.

Response Format

Present findings first, ordered by severity.

For each finding, include:

After findings, include:

If there are no findings, explicitly say no findings were identified.

Default Review Stance

Evidence Standards

Example Triggers

This skill should trigger for requests such as:

Non-Goals