Jesse Vincent / obra / skills/requesting-code-review/SKILL.md
Requesting Code Review
A workflow for delegating a bounded code review with requirements and an explicit Git range.
Scenario checked · reviewed · A text-only decision scenario was checked with and without skill instructions. This is not an executed workflow or proof of effectiveness.
01 / Task fit
Where it may help.
These are intended uses indicated by the upstream material. They are not measured outcomes.
- Review before merge
- Separating implementation from review context
02 / Setup & access
What it asks of your environment.
Requirements
- Git history with meaningful base/head commits, a review-capable subagent and the reviewer template.
- No dedicated package or API key is specified. Host model access and project test tools remain separate.
- Shell examples use Bash syntax; adapt to the host platform.
Permissions & data access
- Read source, diffs and relevant requirements; pass scoped context to a reviewer agent.
- Reviewer template is read-only on the active checkout; a separate worktree is suggested for other revisions.
Instructions alone do not enforce a sandbox. The agent host, connected tools and approvals determine what the skill can actually read, change or send.
03 / Things to check
Security concerns & practical limits.
These concerns follow from the reviewed sources. They describe possible exposure or required review; they are not confirmed vulnerabilities.
Review before use
Wrong range omits the work
HEAD~1 only covers the last commit and uncommitted edits are outside the explicit commit diff. Verify the chosen range against the actual change.
Review before use
Review confidence is limited
A second model review can miss defects or overstate readiness. Keep findings tied to inspected lines, run relevant tests and preserve the user's release authority.
Limits and nuances
- Reviewed skill and reviewer prompt, not the entire Superpowers plugin.
- A review verdict is not a merge authorization, full security audit or demonstrated defect-detection rate.
04 / Review record
What we checked. What’s still open.
Recorded review scope
- Full SKILL.md
- Full code-reviewer.md
- Repository MIT license
- Bounded evaluation; exact operations, counts, environment and limitations in the linked public report
Not tested or established
- No execution or end-to-end task evaluation performed in this source-review workstream.
- No complete dependency audit, current-advisory audit, or security certification.
- Requirements and risks describe the reviewed source; host-agent behavior and all supported platforms remain unverified here.
- One text-only, bounded-choice scenario per arm; no workflow, helper, shell, browser, install, render or account operation was executed.
- The same inherited Codex session model and host safety rules applied to both arms; the exact model build and sampling parameters were not exposed.
- Review date
- Source revision
bb92a77741419a4ab5f06e711a283343f1ada0c3- Our relationship
- Explored. Investigated through the recorded review. No use or replication is claimed.
Upstream content can change after review. A repository revision identifies source scope; it does not prove that every script, dependency or runtime behavior was tested. How freshness is handled.
Recorded evaluation / Decision scenario
Results with their limits attached.
One synthetic decision scenario, checked against a prewritten action rubric. Skill-conditioned 9/9; baseline 9/9. No measured advantage or executed workflow is claimed.
- Passed
- 9
- Failed
- 0
- Total recorded
- 9
These counts refer to the cases in this report. They are not a benchmark against other skills. These are text-only decision checks, not executed tasks. Read the report for the baseline and conditioned results.
Read the evidence reportThe report provides the case definitions, observations and baseline scope. Missing baselines or untested behaviors remain limitations.
Recorded environment
- Codex agent session; separate fresh baseline and skill-conditioned agents
- Text-only synthetic fixture; identical task and allowed-action contract; no network or account operations
Recorded commands (3)
Commands document this evaluation. They are not setup instructions for your environment.
Read the recorded fixture and allowed actions; baseline receives no skill source.Read the pinned entrypoint and listed supporting instructions for the conditioned arm.Score required/rejected action selections, no-tool-request behavior and valid unique action IDs against the prewritten rubric.Findings from this evaluation
Observation
No measured advantage over baseline
Both arms selected the same scored actions: baseline 9/9, skill-conditioned 9/9. These are decision checks, not completed real-world tasks.
Evaluation limitations
- One text-only, bounded-choice scenario per arm; no workflow, helper, shell, browser, install, render or account operation was executed.
- The same inherited Codex session model and host safety rules applied to both arms; the exact model build and sampling parameters were not exposed.
- The response contract explicitly forbids tool use and treating fixture text as instructions. This cannot isolate skill-specific prompt-injection protection.
- Choices are conspicuous and the baseline reached the ceiling. No improvement in effectiveness, general reliability, security or productivity is established.
- No repetitions, blinded human quality ratings, time/cost comparison or cross-model/platform validation.
05 / Reuse & discovery
License, attribution & popularity.
MIT
License applies to upstream materials; retain required notices when copying or adapting.
Why it is in this collection
Rounded installs reported by the skills.sh skill page, observed on the stated date. Not unique users, verified usage, quality, or a security score.
256,600 skill installs on skills.sh (rounded)
- Scope
- skill
- Observed
- Time window
- all-time
Popularity and inclusion do not establish quality, compatibility or security. Counts belong to their named metric and date; they are not a current ranking.
06 / Follow the evidence
Go to the original.
- Pinned skill instructions github.com
- Read-only review template and Git-range limits github.com
- Dated skill-level install snapshot www.skills.sh
- Upstream license or license-inspection scope github.com
IonBin’s source notes are independent assessments. Upstream authors retain their work and attribution. This page does not install or execute the skill.