fluxly Search skills… ⌘K 中文 Publish

code-review

Engineering Verified v1.0.0
Fluxly profile Facts only: domain, agents, trust score, runtime, permissions and network
Domain
Engineering · code · review · quality
Compatible agents
  • Claude Code
  • Cursor
  • Cline
  • Codex
  • Windsurf
  • Gemini CLI
  • +20
Trust score
98 / 100 · audit passed
Author / version / license
@RTGS2017 · v1.0.0 · no license declared
Token usage
Lean
Setup complexity
Plug-and-play
External API key
Not required
Operating systems
Unspecified (assume cross-platform)
Runtime requirements
Python
Permissions
  • Read-only
  • Write / modify
Network behavior
Local-only
Install commands
26 variants

Profile is derived at build time from SKILL.md and install vectors. Subject to drift from author intent.

Output preview code-review-rtgs2017.preview 
---
name: code-review
description: 本技能提供专业的代码审查能力，帮助发现潜在问题并提供改进建议。 用户: "帮我审查这段 Python 代码" → 加载此技能，按照上述流程进行代码审查 runs entirely locall…
category: engineering
runtime: Python
---

# code-review output preview

## PART A: Task fit
- Use case: 本技能提供专业的代码审查能力，帮助发现潜在问题并提供改进建议。 用户: "帮我审查这段 Python 代码" → 加载此技能，按照上述流程进行代码审查 runs entirely locally; runs on Python. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, Cline and 23 more..
- Inputs: target material, constraints, expected output, and acceptance criteria.
- Evidence boundary: follow “审查维度 / 1. 代码质量 / 2. 潜在问题” and do not present inference as author intent.

## PART B: Execution result
- **01** The card summarizes the use case; runtime output centers on “本技能提供专业的代码审查能力，帮助发现潜在问题并提供改进建议。 用户: "帮我审查这段 Python 代码" → 加载此技能，按照上述流程进行代码审查 runs entirely locally; runs on Python. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, Cline and 23 more.”.
- **02** When the source has headings, the agent prioritizes “审查维度 / 1. 代码质量 / 2. 潜在问题” so the result follows the author’s structure.
- **03** Typical output includes task judgment, concrete steps, required commands or file edits, validation, and follow-up options.
- **04** Risk context follows the fingerprint: read files, write/modify files; mostly runs locally; usually needs no extra API key.

## Running Rules
- read files, write/modify files; mostly runs locally; usually needs no extra API key.
- Validate with a small sample before expanding scope.
- Return the result, validation criteria, and next iteration options.
Interpretation is structured for decision-making; original keeps the upstream SKILL.md unchanged.

Decide Fit First

  • Core job: 本技能提供专业的代码审查能力，帮助发现潜在问题并提供改进建议。 1. 代码质量 可读性: 命名规范、注释完整性、代码结构 可维护性: 模块化程度、耦合度、复杂度 一致性: 代码风格、设计模式使用 2. 潜在问题 Bug 风险: 空指针、边界条件、异常处理…
  • Best fit: Use it when the task has reusable inputs, steps, and validation criteria rather than a one-off answer.
  • Avoid forcing it: If the source lacks commands, platform support, or external-service evidence, keep those fields unknown instead of guessing.

Design Intent

  • Structure: The skill is organized around “审查维度”, “1. 代码质量”, “2. 潜在问题”, “3. 最佳实践”, showing how the author expects the agent to judge fit, collect context, and produce verifiable output.
  • Trigger evidence: Prioritize the author’s wording around when to use it, what context to collect, and what output shape to produce.
  • Evidence boundary: Author text states facts, repository files prove commands and paths, and Fluxly only adds fit, limits, and usage judgment.

How To Use It

  • Inputs: Provide target material, scope, expected result, forbidden changes, and validation method.
  • Invocation: Name code-review directly; if the source includes slash commands, start with the command and then add task context.
  • Validation: Start small and check whether the result follows “审查维度 / 1. 代码质量 / 2. 潜在问题” before expanding.

Boundaries And Review

  • Dependencies: It usually needs no extra API key, so start with a small validation task.
  • Permissions: Declared permissions include read / write; ask the agent to state file, command, and rollback boundaries before acting.
  • Quality bar: A useful result names the deliverable, evidence, and next action. Generic prose means the task needs tighter context.

Discussion

Powered by GitHub Discussions. Sign in with GitHub to comment, react, or subscribe.