
Code Review
- 272 installs
- smithery.ai
Use code-review for development tasks
About
code-review: A skill for development. This provides functionality for development workflows.
- code-review
Code Review by the numbers
- 272 all-time installs (skills.sh)
- +5 installs in the week ending Jul 27, 2026 (Skillselion tracking)
- Ranked #1,414 of 4,347 Backend & APIs skills by installs in the Skillselion catalog
- Data as of Jul 27, 2026 (Skillselion catalog sync)
npx skills add https://github.com/smithery.ai --skill code-reviewAdd your badge
Show developers this skill is listed on Skillselion. Paste this into your README.
| Installs | 272 |
|---|---|
| Repository | smithery.ai ↗ |
What it does
Use code-review for development tasks
Files
Code Review Skill
Review code changes in coder/coder and identify bugs, security issues, and quality problems.
Workflow
1. Get the code changes - Use the method provided in the prompt, or if none specified:
- For a PR:
gh pr diff <PR_NUMBER> --repo coder/coder - For local changes:
git diff mainorgit diff --staged
2. Read full files and related code before commenting - verify issues exist and consider how similar code is implemented elsewhere in the codebase
3. Analyze for issues - Focus on what could break production
4. Report findings - Use the method provided in the prompt, or summarize directly
Severity Levels
- 🔴 CRITICAL: Security vulnerabilities, auth bypass, data corruption,
crashes
- 🟡 IMPORTANT: Logic bugs, race conditions, resource leaks, unhandled
errors
- 🔵 NITPICK: Minor improvements, style issues, portability concerns
What to Look For
- Security: Auth bypass, injection, data exposure, improper access control
- Correctness: Logic errors, off-by-one, nil/null handling, error paths
- Concurrency: Race conditions, deadlocks, missing synchronization
- Resources: Leaks, unclosed handles, missing cleanup
- Error handling: Swallowed errors, missing validation, panic paths
What NOT to Comment On
- Style that matches existing Coder patterns (check AGENTS.md first)
- Code that already exists unchanged
- Theoretical issues without concrete impact
- Changes unrelated to the PR's purpose
Coder-Specific Patterns
Authorization Context
// Public endpoints needing system access
dbauthz.AsSystemRestricted(ctx)
// Authenticated endpoints with user context - just use ctx
api.Database.GetResource(ctx, id)Error Handling
// OAuth2 endpoints use RFC-compliant errors
writeOAuth2Error(ctx, rw, http.StatusBadRequest, "invalid_grant", "description")
// Regular endpoints use httpapi
httpapi.Write(ctx, rw, http.StatusBadRequest, codersdk.Response{...})Shell Scripts
set -u only catches UNDEFINED variables, not empty strings:
unset VAR; echo ${VAR} # ERROR with set -u
VAR=""; echo ${VAR} # OK with set -u (empty is fine)
VAR="${INPUT:-}"; echo ${VAR} # OK - always definedGitHub Actions context variables (github.*, inputs.*) are always defined.
Review Quality
- Explain impact ("causes crash when X" not "could be better")
- Make observations actionable with specific fixes
- Read the full context before commenting on a line
- Check AGENTS.md for project conventions before flagging style
Comment Standards
- Only comment when confident - If you're not 80%+ sure it's a real issue,
don't comment. Verify claims before posting.
- No speculation - Avoid "might", "could", "consider". State facts or skip.
- Verify technical claims - Check documentation or code before asserting how
something works. Don't guess at API behavior or syntax rules.