anyproto

code-review-developer

@anyproto/code-review-developer
anyproto
424
66 forks
Updated 1/6/2026
View on GitHub

Code Review Developer (Smart Router): Context-aware routing to code review guidelines. Helps you conduct thorough, actionable code reviews following project standards.

Installation

$skills install @anyproto/code-review-developer
Claude Code
Cursor
Copilot
Codex
Antigravity

Details

Path.claude/skills/code-review-developer/SKILL.md
Branchdevelop
Scoped Name@anyproto/code-review-developer

Usage

After installing, this skill will be available to your AI coding assistant.

Verify installation:

skills list

Skill Instructions

Code Review Developer (Smart Router)

Purpose

Context-aware routing to code review guidelines. Helps you conduct thorough, actionable code reviews following project standards.

When Auto-Activated

  • Reviewing pull requests or code changes
  • Keywords: code review, PR review, review code, pull request, approve, issues
  • Discussing review comments or feedback

🚨 CRITICAL RULES (NEVER VIOLATE)

  1. Be LEAN and ACTIONABLE - Only report actual issues, no noise
  2. NO praise sections - No "Strengths", no "no concerns" statements
  3. NO design suggestions - You cannot see visual design (padding, margins, colors)
  4. Reference file:line - Always include specific locations for issues
  5. If clean, just approve - "āœ… Approved - No issues found" (nothing else!)
  6. Check CLAUDE.md - Review against project conventions

šŸ“‹ Quick Review Workflow

1. Read the Changes

  • Understand what the PR is trying to do
  • Check file diffs thoroughly

2. Check Against CLAUDE.md

  • Localization: Using Loc constants?
  • Generated files: Not editing generated code?
  • Code style: Following Swift best practices?
  • Tests: Updated when refactoring?

3. Look for Real Issues

ONLY include sections if issues exist:

  • Bugs/Issues - Logic errors, potential bugs
  • Best Practices - Violations of CLAUDE.md guidelines
  • Performance - Actual performance problems
  • Security - Real security vulnerabilities

4. Format Your Review

If clean:

āœ… **Approved** - No issues found

CRITICAL: When approving, output ONLY the line above. NO additional explanation, NO listing what the PR does, NO praise. Just the approval line.

If issues found:

## Bugs/Issues

**ChatView.swift:45**
Potential race condition when...

---

āš ļø **Minor Issues** - Fix race condition

āš ļø Common Mistakes to Avoid

Assuming Code is Unused After UI Removal

Scenario: PR removes a menu button but leaves the menu parameter

āŒ WRONG:

"The menu parameter is now unused and should be removed"

āœ… CORRECT:

Check if menu is used elsewhere:
- Long-press context menu?
- Dual UX pattern (button + long-press)?
- Multiple consumers?

Example:

// menu() is used in BOTH places
.toolbar { Menu { menu() } }     // Visible button (removed)
.contextMenu { menu() }          // Long-press (still there!)

Before suggesting removal:

  • Searched ALL usages in the file
  • Checked for dual UX patterns
  • Understood purpose of each flag
  • Asked about design intent if unsure

Not Understanding Conditional Flags

Scenario: Component has allowMenuContent and allowContextMenuItems

āŒ WRONG:

"These flags serve the same purpose, consolidate them"

āœ… CORRECT:

They control DIFFERENT UI elements:
- allowMenuContent: Visible button
- allowContextMenuItems: Long-press menu
- Can be independently enabled/disabled

šŸŽÆ Review Sections (Include ONLY If Issues Exist)

Bugs/Issues

Logic errors, potential bugs that need fixing

Format:

**FileName.swift:123**
Description of the bug and why it's a problem.

Best Practices

Violations of Swift/SwiftUI conventions or CLAUDE.md guidelines (code quality only, not design)

Format:

**FileName.swift:45**
Using hardcoded strings instead of Loc constants.

Performance

Actual performance problems (not theoretical)

Format:

**ViewModel.swift:89**
N+1 query in loop - will cause performance issues with large datasets.

Security

Real security vulnerabilities

Format:

**AuthService.swift:34**
Storing credentials in UserDefaults - should use Keychain.

šŸ“Š Summary Format

End with ONE sentence with status emoji:

āœ… **Approved** - Clean implementation following guidelines
āš ļø **Minor Issues** - Fix hardcoded strings and race condition
🚨 **Major Issues** - Critical security vulnerability in auth flow

šŸ” Analysis Checklist

Before finalizing your review:

  • Checked against CLAUDE.md conventions
  • Verified localization (no hardcoded strings)
  • Checked for generated file edits
  • Looked for race conditions
  • Verified tests/mocks updated if refactoring
  • Searched for ALL usages before suggesting removal
  • Only included sections with actual issues
  • No design/UI suggestions (padding, margins, colors)
  • Referenced specific file:line for each issue
  • Ended with status emoji summary

šŸ“š Complete Documentation

Full Guide: .claude/CODE_REVIEW_GUIDE.md

For comprehensive coverage of:

  • Core review rules
  • Common analysis mistakes (with examples)
  • Review sections and formats
  • Complete checklist

CI/Automation: .github/workflows/pr-review-automation.md

For GitHub Actions integration:

  • Context variables (REPO, PR_NUMBER, COMMIT_SHA)
  • Valid runners and Xcode versions
  • Review comment strategies
  • How to post reviews via gh CLI

šŸ’” Quick Reference

What to Check

From CLAUDE.md:

  • No hardcoded strings (use Loc constants)
  • No generated file edits (// Generated using...)
  • Tests/mocks updated when refactoring
  • Feature flags for new features
  • No whitespace trimming
  • Async/await over completion handlers

Code Quality:

  • Swift best practices (guard, @MainActor)
  • Proper error handling
  • No force unwraps in production code
  • Memory leaks (weak/unowned where needed)

What NOT to Comment On

  • āŒ Design/UI spacing (padding, margins)
  • āŒ Colors or visual appearance
  • āŒ Praise or "Strengths" sections
  • āŒ "No concerns" statements
  • āŒ Theoretical performance issues
  • āŒ Style preferences not in CLAUDE.md

šŸŽ“ Example Reviews

Example 1: Clean PR

āœ… **Approved** - No issues found

That's it! Absolutely nothing else. Not even in comments posted to GitHub.

āŒ WRONG (too verbose):

āœ… **Approved** - No issues found

The PR correctly implements per-chat notification overrides:
- Added force list properties with proper subscription keys
- effectiveNotificationMode(for:) method correctly prioritizes...

āœ… CORRECT:

āœ… **Approved** - No issues found

Example 2: Minor Issues

## Best Practices

**ChatView.swift:34**
Using hardcoded string "Send Message" instead of localization constant.
Should be: `Text(Loc.sendMessage)`

**ChatViewModel.swift:89**
Tests not updated after renaming `sendMessage()` to `send()`.
Update `ChatViewModelTests.swift` to use new method name.

---

āš ļø **Minor Issues** - Fix hardcoded string and update tests

Example 3: Critical Issue

## Bugs/Issues

**AuthService.swift:45**
Storing password in UserDefaults (line 45). This is a security vulnerability.
Should use Keychain instead: `KeychainService.store(password, for: key)`

---

🚨 **Major Issues** - Fix password storage security vulnerability

šŸ”— Related Skills & Docs

  • ios-dev-guidelines → IOS_DEVELOPMENT_GUIDE.md - Swift/iOS patterns to check against
  • localization-developer → LOCALIZATION_GUIDE.md - Verify no hardcoded strings
  • code-generation-developer → CODE_GENERATION_GUIDE.md - Verify no generated file edits

Navigation: This is a smart router. For detailed review standards and common mistakes, always refer to .claude/CODE_REVIEW_GUIDE.md.

For CI/automation: See .github/workflows/pr-review-automation.md for GitHub Actions integration.