Аудит безопасности

Gen Agent Trust Hub

pass

This skill provides a structured way to request and process code reviews using a subagent. It retrieves git diffs and commit information to present changes for assessment. While it uses dynamic command assembly and placeholder interpolation which are standard for such tools, no malicious behaviors, data exfiltration, or safety bypasses were found.

Audited: 5/5/2026, 10:41:15 AM

Socket

pass

No alerts

Audited: 5/5/2026, 10:41:16 AM

Snyk

pass

Risk: LOW · No issues

Audited: 5/5/2026, 10:40:41 AM

Runlayer

pass

2 files scanned · No issues

Audited: 3/12/2026, 9:10:59 AM

ZeroLeaks

pass

Score: 93/100 · 2 sections analyzed

Audited: 4/16/2026, 10:11:02 AM

Промпт скилла

Requesting Code Review

Dispatch a code reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade. The reviewer gets precisely crafted context for evaluation — never your session's history.

Core principle: Review early, review often.

When to Request Review

Mandatory:

After each task in subagent-driven development
After completing major feature
Before merge to main

Optional but valuable:

When stuck (fresh perspective)
Before refactoring (baseline check)
After fixing complex bug

How to Request

1. Get git SHAs:

BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1)  # or origin/main
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

2. Dispatch code reviewer subagent:

Dispatch a general-purpose subagent, filling the template at code-reviewer.md

Placeholders:

{DESCRIPTION} - Brief summary of what you built
{PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS} - What it should do
{BASE_SHA} - Starting commit
{HEAD_SHA} - Ending commit

3. Act on feedback:

Fix Critical issues immediately
Fix Important issues before proceeding
Note Minor issues for later
Push back if reviewer is wrong (with reasoning)

Example

[Just completed Task 2: Add verification function]

You: Let me request code review before proceeding.

BASE_SHA=$(git log --oneline | grep "Task 1" | head -1 | awk '{print $1}')
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

[Dispatch code reviewer subagent]
  DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types
  PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from docs/superpowers/plans/deployment-plan.md
  BASE_SHA: a7981ec
  HEAD_SHA: 3df7661

[Subagent returns]:
  Strengths: Clean architecture, real tests
  Issues:
    Important: Missing progress indicators
    Minor: Magic number (100) for reporting interval
  Assessment: Ready to proceed

You: [Fix progress indicators]
[Continue to Task 3]

Common Rationalizations

Excuse	Reality
"I'll just review the diff myself instead of dispatching a reviewer"	You're the coordinator — reviewing the diff inline burns the context window you need to keep driving the work. Dispatch a reviewer subagent: the diff and the evaluation live in its context, and only the findings come back to you.
"The reviewer needs my whole session history to understand the change"	Hand it precisely crafted context, never your session's history. That keeps the reviewer on the work product, not your thought process.

Red Flags

Never:

Skip review because "it's simple"
Ignore Critical issues
Proceed with unfixed Important issues
Argue with valid technical feedback

If reviewer wrong:

Push back with technical reasoning
Show code/tests that prove it works
Request clarification

See template at: code-reviewer.md

requesting-code-review

Установить скилл

Аудит безопасности

Gen Agent Trust Hub

Socket

Snyk

Runlayer

ZeroLeaks

Промпт скилла

Requesting Code Review

When to Request Review

How to Request

Example

Common Rationalizations

Red Flags

Все файлы скилла

Другие скиллы автора

brainstorming

systematic-debugging

writing-plans

using-superpowers

test-driven-development

executing-plans

verification-before-completion

subagent-driven-development

receiving-code-review

dispatching-parallel-agents

using-git-worktrees

finishing-a-development-branch