Code Review Skill for Codex

Purpose

Provide thorough code review focusing on high-signal issues with confidence-based filtering.

When to Use

Trigger this skill when:

• •Reviewing pull requests
• •Checking code before commit
• •Auditing code changes
• •Validating guideline compliance

Review Process

Step 1: Assess Scope

Determine what to review:

• •Skip closed or draft PRs
• •Skip trivial changes
• •Skip automated PRs
• •Identify relevant project guidelines

Step 2: Gather Context

Collect information:

• •Read CLAUDE.md and project guidelines
• •Review PR description and intent
• •Understand modified files
• •Check git history if needed

Step 3: Multi-Perspective Analysis

Guideline Compliance

Check for violations of:

• •CLAUDE.md rules
• •CONTRIBUTING.md requirements
• •Code style guidelines
• •Architectural patterns

Only flag documented violations.

Bug Detection

Look for:

• •Syntax and type errors
• •Logic errors
• •Null/undefined issues
• •Resource leaks
• •Missing error handling
• •Security vulnerabilities

Quality Assessment

Evaluate:

• •Code clarity
• •Performance implications
• •API usage
• •Edge case handling

Step 4: Confidence Scoring

Rate each issue 0-100:

• •0-25: Low confidence
• •26-50: Moderate confidence
• •51-75: High confidence
• •76-100: Very high confidence

Threshold: Only report issues ≥ 80 confidence

Step 5: Report Issues

For each valid issue:

### Issue: [Title]
Confidence: [85]/100
Category: [Bug/Guideline/Security/Performance]

Problem: [Explanation]
Location: file.ext:L10-L15
Evidence: [Code quote]
Guideline: [Rule reference if applicable]
Fix: [Suggested solution]

High Signal Criteria

DO flag:

• •Syntax/type errors, missing imports
• •Clear logic errors
• •Unambiguous guideline violations
• •Security vulnerabilities
• •Resource leaks
• •Missing critical error handling

DO NOT flag:

• •Style preferences (unless documented)
• •Subjective suggestions
• •Nitpicks
• •Linter-catchable issues
• •Pre-existing problems
• •State-dependent issues

False Positive Prevention

Avoid:

• •Issues not in current changes
• •Code that looks wrong but isn't
• •Pedantic nitpicks
• •Quality concerns unless required
• •Suppressed issues

Output Format

Issues Found

## Code Review

Found [N] issues:

[For each issue: Title, Confidence, Category, Problem, Location, Evidence, Fix]

No Issues

## Code Review

No issues found. Checked for bugs, guidelines, and quality.

Best Practices

1. •Read guidelines first
2. •Be specific with locations
3. •Explain reasoning
4. •Provide concrete fixes
5. •Prioritize severity
6. •Respect intent
7. •Avoid nitpicking
8. •Verify claims

Requirements

• •Project guidelines (CLAUDE.md, etc.)
• •Code repository access
• •Understanding of project language/framework