review-agent

Name: review-agent
Author: openai

101kstars15kforks

How to install review-agent?

openai/codex/review-agent

$npx -y skills add openai/codex --skill review-agent

Installs into the current project.

Summary

Perform a read-only, defect-first review of a specified code change and return every actionable finding. Use when another agent delegates review of uncommitted changes, a base-branch diff, a commit, or custom review instructions.

Files · 1

View on GitHub

SKILL.md

1	# Review Agent
2
3	Inspect the requested target directly and return every finding that the author would likely fix.
4	Do not modify files, create commits, push branches, post review comments, or delegate the review
5	to another agent.
6
7	## Review the change
8
9	1. Read the applicable `AGENTS.md` instructions.
10	2. Inspect the complete diff for the requested target and enough surrounding code to understand
11	each changed path.
12	3. Identify concrete regressions introduced by the change. Continue through the whole diff after
13	finding the first issue.
14	4. Check the relevant tests and call sites to confirm that each finding is real and actionable.
15
16	For a base-branch review, compare the changes that would actually merge rather than diffing
17	directly against the branch tip. Resolve the comparison ref to the branch's upstream when that
18	upstream exists and is ahead of the local branch; otherwise use the local branch. Run
19	`git merge-base HEAD <comparison-ref>`, then inspect `git diff <merge-base-sha>`. If the local
20	branch cannot be resolved, try its configured upstream explicitly before reporting that the target
21	is unavailable.
22
23	Flag an issue only when all of these are true:
24
25	- It affects correctness, security, performance, or maintainability in a meaningful way.
26	- It is discrete and actionable.
27	- It was introduced by the reviewed change.
28	- The affected scenario or call path can be demonstrated from the code.
29	- The author would probably fix it if they knew about it.
30
31	Do not flag speculative concerns, pre-existing problems, intentional behavior changes, or style
32	nits that do not obscure the code.
33
34	## Write the result
35
36	Present findings first, ordered by severity. Use one entry per issue in this form:
37
38	`[P1] Imperative finding title — path/to/file.rs:line`
39
40	Follow the title with one short paragraph explaining the affected scenario and why the behavior is
41	wrong. Keep the cited range as small as possible and make sure it overlaps the reviewed diff.
42
43	Use these priorities:
44
45	- `P0`: universal release blocker or critical failure.
46	- `P1`: urgent defect that should be fixed next.
47	- `P2`: ordinary defect that should be fixed.
48	- `P3`: low-impact issue that is still worth fixing.
49
50	If there are no qualifying findings, say `No findings.` Do not invent a finding to fill the result.
51	After the findings, add a brief overall assessment and mention any material test gaps or residual
52	risks.

People who liked this also viewed

6 picks

Type

review-agent

101kstars15kforks

View on GitHub

How to install review-agent?

openai/codex/review-agent

$npx -y skills add openai/codex --skill review-agent

Installs into the current project.

Summary

Files · 1

View on GitHub

SKILL.md

1	# Review Agent
2
3	Inspect the requested target directly and return every finding that the author would likely fix.
4	Do not modify files, create commits, push branches, post review comments, or delegate the review
5	to another agent.
6
7	## Review the change
8
9	1. Read the applicable `AGENTS.md` instructions.
10	2. Inspect the complete diff for the requested target and enough surrounding code to understand
11	each changed path.
12	3. Identify concrete regressions introduced by the change. Continue through the whole diff after
13	finding the first issue.
14	4. Check the relevant tests and call sites to confirm that each finding is real and actionable.
15
16	For a base-branch review, compare the changes that would actually merge rather than diffing
17	directly against the branch tip. Resolve the comparison ref to the branch's upstream when that
18	upstream exists and is ahead of the local branch; otherwise use the local branch. Run
19	`git merge-base HEAD <comparison-ref>`, then inspect `git diff <merge-base-sha>`. If the local
20	branch cannot be resolved, try its configured upstream explicitly before reporting that the target
21	is unavailable.
22
23	Flag an issue only when all of these are true:
24
25	- It affects correctness, security, performance, or maintainability in a meaningful way.
26	- It is discrete and actionable.
27	- It was introduced by the reviewed change.
28	- The affected scenario or call path can be demonstrated from the code.
29	- The author would probably fix it if they knew about it.
30
31	Do not flag speculative concerns, pre-existing problems, intentional behavior changes, or style
32	nits that do not obscure the code.
33
34	## Write the result
35
36	Present findings first, ordered by severity. Use one entry per issue in this form:
37
38	`[P1] Imperative finding title — path/to/file.rs:line`
39
40	Follow the title with one short paragraph explaining the affected scenario and why the behavior is
41	wrong. Keep the cited range as small as possible and make sure it overlaps the reviewed diff.
42
43	Use these priorities:
44
45	- `P0`: universal release blocker or critical failure.
46	- `P1`: urgent defect that should be fixed next.
47	- `P2`: ordinary defect that should be fixed.
48	- `P3`: low-impact issue that is still worth fixing.
49
50	If there are no qualifying findings, say `No findings.` Do not invent a finding to fill the result.
51	After the findings, add a brief overall assessment and mention any material test gaps or residual
52	risks.

People who liked this also viewed

6 picks

Type