Code Review Skill

This skill performs code reviews following the team's quality assurance guidelines.

Source of Truth

• •Review Format: output-formats.md
• •Quality Standards: quality-assurance.md
• •Security Guidelines: security.md

When to Activate

This skill activates in these scenarios:

1. •Explicit request: User asks for code review directly
2. •After code writing: User asks "이거 괜찮아?", "확인해줘", "문제 없어?" after Claude wrote code
3. •Change verification: User wants to check staged/unstaged changes
4. •PR preparation: Before committing, user wants quality check

Review Principles

When reviewing code, follow these core principles:

• •Actionable feedback: Every issue must have a clear fix suggestion
• •Prioritized issues: Critical issues first, then improvements
• •Balanced perspective: Acknowledge good practices, not just problems
• •Educational tone: Explain WHY something is an issue

Instructions

Step 1: Understand the Scope

1. •

   Identify what code to review:

   • •Just written code: Review the changes Claude just made in this conversation
   • •Specific file(s): Files provided by user
   • •Recent changes: git diff for unstaged, git diff --cached for staged
   • •PR/commit changes: git show <commit>
2. •

   Read the code thoroughly before commenting

Step 2: Analyze Code

Check for issues in these categories:

Step 3: Apply Self-Review Checklist

Before providing feedback, verify against this checklist:

• • All tests pass (if applicable)
• • Edge cases handled
• • Performance impact considered
• • No security vulnerabilities
• • Error messages are user-friendly
• • No commented-out code
• • No debug statements (console.log, print, etc.)

Step 4: Format Review Output

Use this structured format for review results:

## 코드 리뷰 결과

### 📊 전체 평가

- **품질**: [상/중/하]
- **주요 이슈**: [N개 발견]
- **긴급도**: [즉시 수정 필요/개선 권장/양호]

### 🔴 Critical Issues (우선순위: 높음)

**[Issue Title]** (`file:line`)

- **Problem**: [명확한 문제 설명]
- **Impact**: [영향 범위와 위험도]
- **Fix**: [구체적인 수정 방법]

\`\`\`[language]
// Bad
[problematic code]

// Good
[fixed code]
\`\`\`

### 🟡 Improvements (우선순위: 중간)

1. **[Issue Title]** (`file:line`)
   - [문제 설명]
   - [개선 방법]

### 🟢 Good Practices

- ✅ [잘 작성된 부분 1]
- ✅ [잘 작성된 부분 2]

### ✅ Action Items

1. [ ] [우선순위별 작업 목록]
2. [ ] [...]

Simplified Output (for small changes)

When reviewing small changes or code just written, use a lighter format:

## 리뷰 결과

✅ **양호** - 주요 문제 없음

### 확인 사항

- ✅ [확인된 항목 1]
- ✅ [확인된 항목 2]

### 개선 제안 (선택)

- 💡 [사소한 개선 사항]

Issue Templates

Security Issue

**[보안 취약점 유형]** (`file:line`)

- **Problem**: [취약점 설명]
- **Impact**: [공격 시나리오와 피해 범위]
- **Fix**: [수정 방법]
- **Reference**: [OWASP 또는 관련 문서 링크]

Performance Issue

**[성능 문제 유형]** (`file:line`)

- **Problem**: [현재 성능 문제]
- **Impact**: [예상 성능 저하]
- **Fix**: [최적화 방법]

Maintainability Issue

**[유지보수 문제 유형]** (`file:line`)

- **Problem**: [현재 코드의 문제점]
- **Impact**: [향후 유지보수 어려움]
- **Fix**: [리팩토링 제안]

Quality Ratings

품질 평가 기준

긴급도 평가 기준

Response Language

• •Review comments: Korean (한국어)
• •Code examples: English (comments, variable names)
• •Technical terms: Keep in English (e.g., SQL injection, N+1, refactoring)

See Also

• •output-formats.md - Review output format template
• •quality-assurance.md - Quality standards and checklists
• •security.md - Security guidelines
• •technical-standards.md - Code quality requirements