Skip to content
Back to skills

Requesting Code Review

ASecurity

Use when asked to review code, a diff, or a PR. Triggers on: 'review this', 'check my diff', 'review the PR', 'is this code ok', 'look at my changes', 'code review'. Focuses on real bugs, security issues, and env leaks — not style.

  • 3 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 0 views
  • Added September 9, 2026
ai-agentsgobashsqlcode-reviewgitapisecurity

Works with

  • api

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 9, 2026

npx -y skills add yanacuti1121/Yana-AI --skill requesting-code-review --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Requesting Code Review?

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

Security grade badge for Requesting Code Review
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/yanacuti1121-requesting-code-review/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/yanacuti1121-requesting-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: requesting-code-review
description: "Use when asked to review code, a diff, or a PR. Triggers on: 'review this', 'check my diff', 'review the PR', 'is this code ok', 'look at my changes', 'code review'. Focuses on real bugs, security issues, and env leaks — not style."
---

# Requesting Code Review Skill

Code review has one job: find things that will break in production or compromise security.
Style, preference, and micro-optimisations are out of scope unless the reviewer asked for them.

## When to use this skill

- User shares a diff, PR link, or file and asks for review
- User says "review this", "check my changes", "is this safe"
- User is about to merge and wants a second opinion

## What to review

### Priority 1 — Must catch
- **Logic bugs**: off-by-one, wrong condition, silent failure path
- **Security issues**: SQL injection, command injection, XSS, hardcoded secrets, open redirects
- **Env leaks**: `.env` values, tokens, or credentials committed or logged
- **Data loss risk**: missing transaction, unguarded `DELETE`/`DROP`, migration with no rollback

### Priority 2 — Should catch
- **Missing error handling** at system boundaries (external API calls, file I/O, DB queries)
- **Race conditions** or non-atomic operations on shared state
- **Resource leaks**: unclosed connections, missing `finally` blocks
- **Auth bypasses**: missing permission check on a new route/endpoint

### Priority 3 — Note if obvious
- Dead code, console.log left in, commented-out blocks
- Naming that will confuse the next reader

## What NOT to review
- Formatting/indentation (that's a linter's job)
- Personal style preferences
- Architecture opinions unless the user asks
- Hypothetical future concerns ("what if we need to scale this")

## Review format

```markdown
## Code Review

**Reviewed:** [filename or PR#]

### Must fix
- [file:line] [issue] — [why it matters]

### Should fix
- [file:line] [issue]

### Notes
- [file:line] [minor observation]

### Verdict
APPROVE / REQUEST CHANGES / NEEDS DISCUSSION
Reason: [one sentence]
```

If there are no issues, say so explicitly: "No issues found in priority 1-2 categories."

## How to run the review

```bash
# See the full diff first
git diff main...HEAD

# Check for secrets
git diff main...HEAD | grep -iE '(password|secret|token|api_key)\s*='

# Check for debug artifacts
git diff main...HEAD | grep -iE '(console\.log|print\(|debugger|TODO|FIXME)'
```

Show evidence for each finding — do not assert without pointing to the specific line.

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…