360 Secure SkillHub
360 安全技能中心

code-review-analysis

该 Skill 提供系统化代码审查流程,围绕代码质量、安全、性能、测试和最佳实践给出反馈与改进建议;包含分项参考指南、git 差异与提交历史检查示例,以及 Schema 校验脚本和迁移模板。

aj-geddes
热度 23.31
最近更新 2026-10-19 07:39:11
分类:开发依赖:代码执行 / 读写文件应用场景:代码审查

安装技能

复制下面的话术发给你的 Agent,它会通过 secure-skills 检索并安装该技能。

执行命令安装此 skill: npx secure-skills-cli add aj-geddes/useful-ai-prompts/code-review-analysis
Metadata
name
code-review-analysis
description
Perform comprehensive code reviews with best practices, security checks, and constructive feedback. Use when reviewing pull requests, analyzing code quality, checking for security vulnerabilities, or providing code improvement suggestions.

Code Review Analysis

Table of Contents

Overview

Systematic code review process covering code quality, security, performance, maintainability, and best practices following industry standards.

When to Use

  • Reviewing pull requests and merge requests
  • Analyzing code quality before merging
  • Identifying security vulnerabilities
  • Providing constructive feedback to developers
  • Ensuring coding standards compliance
  • Mentoring through code review

Quick Start

Minimal working example:

# Check the changes
git diff main...feature-branch

# Review file changes
git diff --stat main...feature-branch

# Check commit history
git log main...feature-branch --oneline

Reference Guides

Detailed implementations in the references/ directory:

Guide Contents
Initial Assessment Initial Assessment
Code Quality Analysis Code Quality Analysis
Security Review Security Review
Performance Review Performance Review
Testing Review Testing Review
Best Practices Best Practices

Best Practices

✅ DO

  • Be constructive and respectful
  • Explain the "why" behind suggestions
  • Provide code examples
  • Ask questions if unclear
  • Acknowledge good practices
  • Focus on important issues
  • Consider the context
  • Offer to pair program on complex issues

❌ DON'T

  • Be overly critical or personal
  • Nitpick minor style issues (use automated tools)
  • Block on subjective preferences
  • Review too many changes at once (>400 lines)
  • Forget to check tests
  • Ignore security implications
  • Rush the review