Now liveThe Skillselion MCP - thousands of ranked skills, loaded into your agent mid-task. No install.Get it →
laurigates avatar

Code Review Checklist

  • 45 installs
  • 49 repo stars
  • Updated August 4, 2026
  • laurigates/claude-plugins

Helps with ai & agent building tasks.

About

code-review-checklist is a Claude Code skill for ai & agent building. It helps solo builders move faster with AI-assisted development.

  • code-review-checklist
  • AI & Agent Building
  • AI-coding skill

Code Review Checklist by the numbers

  • 45 all-time installs (skills.sh)
  • +1 installs in the week ending Aug 2, 2026 (Skillselion tracking)
  • Ranked #7,749 of 16,546 AI & Agent Building skills by installs in the Skillselion catalog
  • Data as of Aug 5, 2026 (Skillselion catalog sync)
npx skills add https://github.com/laurigates/claude-plugins --skill code-review-checklist

Add your badge

Show developers this skill is listed on Skillselion. Paste this into your README.

Listed on Skillselion
Installs45
repo stars49
Last updatedAugust 4, 2026
Repositorylaurigates/claude-plugins

What it does

Helps with ai & agent building tasks.

Files

SKILL.mdMarkdownGitHub ↗

Code Review Checklist

Structured approach to reviewing code changes.

When to Use This Skill

Use this skill when...Use something else instead when...
Walking a priority-ordered manual review checklistRunning a full delegated review pass → code-review
Hunting for hardcoded secrets, injection, or N+1 query patternsScanning specifically for anti-patterns → code-antipatterns
Verifying error handling and edge cases in a PR diffTargeting swallowed errors directly → code-hidden-failures --track errors
Applying a deterministic checklist to a small changeRefactoring after the checklist surfaces issues → code-refactor

Review Priority Order

1. Security (Critical) - Vulnerabilities, secrets, injection 2. Correctness (High) - Logic errors, breaking changes 3. Performance (Medium) - Inefficiencies, resource leaks 4. Quality (Medium) - Maintainability, readability 5. Style (Low) - Formatting, naming (should be automated)

Security Checklist

Secrets & Credentials

  • [ ] No hardcoded API keys, passwords, tokens
  • [ ] No credentials in logs or error messages
  • [ ] Secrets loaded from environment/vault

Injection Vulnerabilities

  • [ ] SQL queries use parameterized statements
  • [ ] User input is sanitized before HTML output (XSS)
  • [ ] Shell commands don't include user input (command injection)
  • [ ] File paths are validated (path traversal)

Authentication & Authorization

  • [ ] Auth checks on all protected endpoints
  • [ ] Proper session handling
  • [ ] Secure password handling (hashing, not plaintext)

Data Exposure

  • [ ] Sensitive data not logged
  • [ ] API responses don't leak internal details
  • [ ] Error messages don't expose system info

Correctness Checklist

Logic

  • [ ] Edge cases handled (null, empty, boundary values)
  • [ ] Error conditions handled appropriately
  • [ ] Async operations properly awaited
  • [ ] Race conditions considered

Breaking Changes

  • [ ] API contracts maintained
  • [ ] Database migrations are reversible
  • [ ] Feature flags for risky changes

Testing

  • [ ] New code has tests
  • [ ] Tests cover error paths, not just happy path
  • [ ] Existing tests still pass

Performance Checklist

Efficiency

  • [ ] No N+1 queries
  • [ ] Appropriate data structures used
  • [ ] No unnecessary loops or iterations
  • [ ] Caching considered for expensive operations

Resources

  • [ ] Database connections closed/pooled
  • [ ] File handles closed
  • [ ] No memory leaks (event listeners removed, etc.)

Scale

  • [ ] Works with realistic data volumes
  • [ ] Pagination for large result sets
  • [ ] Timeouts on external calls

Quality Checklist

Readability

  • [ ] Clear, descriptive names
  • [ ] Functions do one thing
  • [ ] No overly complex conditionals
  • [ ] Comments explain "why", not "what"

Maintainability

  • [ ] DRY (no copy-paste duplication)
  • [ ] Appropriate abstractions
  • [ ] Dependencies are justified
  • [ ] No dead code

Consistency

  • [ ] Follows project patterns
  • [ ] Matches existing code style
  • [ ] Uses established utilities/helpers

Review Output Format

## Review: [PR Title]

**Risk Level**: LOW | MEDIUM | HIGH | CRITICAL

### Critical Issues
1. [Category] Description (file:line)
   - Impact: What could go wrong
   - Fix: Specific recommendation

### Suggestions
1. [Category] Description (file:line)
   - Why: Reasoning
   - Consider: Alternative approach

### Positive Notes
- [Recognition of good patterns]

Quick Checks

For fast reviews, at minimum check: 1. Any secrets or credentials? 2. Any SQL/command injection? 3. Are error cases handled? 4. Do tests exist for new code?

Related skills

This week in AI coding

Five minutes, every Monday - the tools, releases and tactics for developers.

unsubscribe anytime.