API审查
- 作者仓库星标 0
- 作者更新于 实时读取
- 作者仓库 skills-registry
- 领域
- 工程开发
- 兼容 Agent
-
- Claude Code
- Cursor
- Cline
- Codex
- Windsurf
- Gemini CLI
- +20
- 信任分
- 88 / 100 · 社区维护
- 作者 / 版本 / 许可
- @tomevault-io · 未声明 license
- Token 消耗评级
- 低消耗
- 接入复杂程度
- 即装即用
- 是否需要外部 API Key
- 不需要
- 兼容的系统
- 未声明（默认跨平台）
- 底层运行要求
- 无特殊要求
- 文件与系统权限
-
- 只读
- 允许写入 / 修改
- 网络行为
- 仅限本地
- 安装命令数
- 26 条
档案由构建时根据 SKILL.md 与安装命令自动衍生，可能与作者实际意图存在差异。
需要注意： 未限定 allowed-tools，默认拥有全部工具权限。
---
name: address-review
description: Pull unresolved PR review comments and address them. Handles code fixes, spec proposal approvals…
category: 工程开发
runtime: 无特殊运行时
---
# address-review 输出预览
## PART A: 任务判断
- 适用问题：代码实现、重构、调试或代码审查。
- 输入要求：目标材料、限制条件、期望输出和验收方式。
- 证据边界：围绕“Process / Step 1: Identify the PR and Feature Folder / Step 2: Pull Unresolved Comments”读取原文规则，不把推断写成作者承诺。
## PART B: 执行结果
- **01** 任务判断：确认你的需求是否属于代码实现、重构、调试或代码审查，并标出输入、限制和预期结果。
- **02** 执行计划：优先按“Process / Step 1: Identify the PR and Feature Folder / Step 2: Pull Unresolved Comments”拆成步骤，说明每一步会读取什么、修改什么、产出什么。
- **03** 交付结果：给出可复制的命令、文件改动、检查清单或内容草稿，并说明如何继续迭代。
- **04** 风险边界：结合 读取文件、写入/修改文件、主要在本地完成、通常不需要额外 API Key 给出执行前确认项。
## Running Rules
- 读取文件、写入/修改文件；主要在本地完成；通常不需要额外 API Key。
- 先小样例验证，再放大到真实任务。
- 交付时同时给结果、检查口径和下一步迭代建议。 先确认触发方式
原文出现了 `/address-review` 这类斜杠命令；如果你的 Agent 支持命令触发，优先用命令开场，再补充目标和边界。
给清楚输入和边界
告诉 Agent 目标文件或材料、期望结果、不可改范围、是否允许联网或执行命令。本 Skill 的权限画像是：读取文件、写入/修改文件。
小样例验证后再放大
先用一个小任务确认它会围绕“Process / Step 1: Identify the PR and Feature Folder / Step 2: Pull Unresolved Comments”工作；涉及文件或命令时，先看 diff、日志、预览或测试结果。
复核后再交付
检查最终产物是否包含明确结果、必要证据和下一步动作；如果输出泛泛而谈，就补充输入、边界和验收标准后重跑。
---
name: address-review
description: Pull unresolved PR review comments and address them. Handles code fixes, spec proposal approvals…
category: 工程开发
source: tomevault-io/skills-registry
---
# address-review
## 什么时候使用
- 用于审阅代码、文档或方案并给出可执行反馈 适合处理工程开发场景下的代码实现、调试、重构、测试或代码审查，核心价值是把输入、判断、执行、验证和交付边界固定下来，避免 Agent 泛泛回答。 把任务拆成可执行、可检查、可继续迭代的步骤；通常…
- 面向代码实现、重构、调试或代码审查，优先处理能明确输入、步骤和验收标准的工作。
## 需要提供什么
- 目标材料、目录范围、期望结果和不可改动内容。
- 是否允许联网、执行命令、读写文件或调用外部服务。
## 执行规则
- 围绕「Process / Step 1: Identify the PR and Feature Folder / Step 2: Pull Unresolved Comments」组织步骤，不把推断写成作者事实。
- 读取文件、写入/修改文件；主要在本地完成；通常不需要额外 API Key。
- 先跑小样例，确认结果可检查后再扩大任务范围。
## 输出要求
- 给出最终产物、关键证据、验证方式和下一步动作。
- 信息不足时标记 unknown，不编造命令、平台或依赖。 证据边界与执行链路
作者原文负责流程事实；仓库文件负责来源和命令；流狐只补充适用场景、限制和质量判断。
skill "address-review" {
输入层 -> 用户目标 + 目标文件 + 禁止范围 + 验收标准
上下文层 -> Process / Step 1: Identify the PR and Feature Folder / Step 2: Pull Unresolved Comments
规则层 -> SKILL.md 触发条件 / 执行顺序 / 输出格式
运行层 -> 无特殊运行时 | 读取文件、写入/修改文件 | 主要在本地完成
安全层 -> 通常不需要额外 API Key + 小任务验证 + diff / 日志复核
输出层 -> 可复制结果 + 检查清单 + 下一步迭代
}Address Review
This skill pulls unresolved review comments from the current branch's PR and addresses them. It handles code changes, spec proposal approvals, and pushes fixes.
Process
Step 1: Identify the PR and Feature Folder
- Run
git branch --show-currentto get the current branch. - Derive the feature folder:
- Strip the
feat/prefix from the branch name. - Extract the first path segment (everything before the second
/) — this is the feature slug. - Feature folder =
spec/features/[slug]/ - Example:
feat/0023-payment-retry/eng-123-retry-endpoint→spec/features/0023-payment-retry/ - Example:
feat/0023-payment-retry→spec/features/0023-payment-retry/
- Strip the
- Use
gh pr view --json number,url,headRefNameto find the open PR for this branch. - If no PR is found, fail with a clear message.
Step 2: Pull Unresolved Comments
- Use
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{number}/commentsto get all review comments. - Filter for unresolved/pending comments (not yet resolved by the author).
- Group comments by category:
Code Comments
General code review feedback — bugs, style, logic issues, suggestions.
Spec Proposal Comments
Comments that reference SPEC-PROPOSAL.md entries. Look for patterns like:
- "SPEC-PROPOSAL: approved" or "SP-001: approved" — reviewer approves the proposal
- "SPEC-PROPOSAL: rejected" or "SP-001: rejected" — reviewer rejects the proposal
- Other comments on SPEC-PROPOSAL.md lines
Step 3: Address Code Comments
For each unresolved code comment:
- Read the referenced file and line range.
- Understand the reviewer's concern.
- Fix the code to address the concern.
- If the fix requires test changes, update tests and ensure they pass.
- If the fix changes behavior covered by
spec://references, verify the references are still correct.
Step 4: Handle Spec Proposals
Read SPEC-PROPOSAL.md from the feature folder (if it exists).
For Approved Proposals
- Read the proposal entry (e.g. SP-001).
- Apply the proposed change to the actual spec file (e.g. update
REQUIREMENTS.md,ADR.md, orDESIGN.mdin the feature folder). - Remove the approved entry from
SPEC-PROPOSAL.md.
For Rejected Proposals
- Read the rejection reason from the review comment.
- Revert any code that was written assuming the proposed spec change.
- Adjust the implementation to work within the existing spec.
- Remove the rejected entry from
SPEC-PROPOSAL.md. - Update tests if the behavior changed.
Cleanup
If all entries in SPEC-PROPOSAL.md are resolved (approved or rejected), delete the file entirely.
Step 5: Run Tests
Run the full test suite (or at minimum, tests related to the changes) to ensure everything passes after the fixes.
Step 6: Commit and Push
- Stage all modified files.
- Commit with message:
fix(NNNN-slug): address review comments for {ISSUE-ID} - Push to the current branch.
Step 7: Report
Present a summary:
- Number of comments addressed
- Code changes made
- Spec proposals approved/rejected and files updated
- Whether SPEC-PROPOSAL.md was cleaned up
- Test results
- Suggest running
/address-reviewagain after the next review cycle - If all comments are resolved and PR is approved, remind the user to merge the PR manually
Source: aqaliarept/sdd — distributed by TomeVault.
先判断是否适合
作者设计意图
作者的方法与取舍
边界和复核