Skip to content
Back to skills

Receiving Code Review

ASecurity

Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions — requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement

  • 36 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 3 views
  • Added May 27, 2026
data-aigoreactcode-reviewgitperformance

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned May 27, 2026

npx -y skills add adriannoes/awesome-vibe-coding --skill receiving-code-review --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Receiving Code Review?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Receiving Code Review
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/adriannoes-receiving-code-review/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/adriannoes-receiving-code-review)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: receiving-code-review
description: Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions — requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement
---

# Receiving Code Review

**Source:** [obra/superpowers](https://github.com/obra/superpowers) (MIT)

## Overview

Code review requires technical evaluation, not emotional performance.

**Core principle:** Verify before implementing. Ask before assuming. Technical correctness over social comfort.

## The Response Pattern

```
WHEN receiving code review feedback:

1. READ: Complete feedback without reacting
2. UNDERSTAND: Restate requirement in own words (or ask)
3. VERIFY: Check against codebase reality
4. EVALUATE: Technically sound for THIS codebase?
5. RESPOND: Technical acknowledgment or reasoned pushback
6. IMPLEMENT: One item at a time, test each
```

## Forbidden Responses

**NEVER:**
- "You're absolutely right!"
- "Great point!" / "Excellent feedback!"
- "Let me implement that now" (before verification)

**INSTEAD:**
- Restate the technical requirement
- Ask clarifying questions
- Push back with technical reasoning if wrong
- Just start working (actions > words)

## Handling Unclear Feedback

```
IF any item is unclear:
  STOP - do not implement anything yet
  ASK for clarification on unclear items

WHY: Items may be related. Partial understanding = wrong implementation.
```

## Implementation Order

```
FOR multi-item feedback:
  1. Clarify anything unclear FIRST
  2. Then implement: blocking issues → simple fixes → complex fixes
  3. Test each fix individually
  4. Verify no regressions
```

## When To Push Back

- Suggestion breaks existing functionality
- Reviewer lacks full context
- Violates YAGNI (unused feature)
- Technically incorrect for this stack
- Conflicts with architectural decisions

**How to push back:** Use technical reasoning, not defensiveness. Reference working tests/code.

## Acknowledging Correct Feedback

When feedback IS correct:
```
✅ "Fixed. [Brief description of what changed]"
✅ "Good catch — [specific issue]. Fixed in [location]."
✅ [Just fix it and show in the code]

❌ "You're absolutely right!"
❌ "Thanks for catching that!"
```

**Why no thanks:** Actions speak. Just fix it.

## The Bottom Line

**External feedback = suggestions to evaluate, not orders to follow.**

Verify. Question. Then implement. No performative agreement. Technical rigor always.

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…