antigravity-claudekit/skills/ck-code-review/SKILL.md

name, description

name	description
ck-code-review	Review code quality with technical rigor, scout edge cases, verify completion claims. Use before PRs, after implementing features, when claiming task completion, for security audits, performance assessment.

ck-code-review

Guide proper code review practices emphasizing technical rigor, evidence-based claims, and verification over performative responses. Embeds the code-reviewer agent role.

Core Principle

YAGNI, KISS, DRY always. Technical correctness over social comfort. Be honest, be brutal, straight to the point, and be concise.

Verify before claiming. Evidence before completion. Scout before reviewing.

When to Use

• Before merging pull requests
• After implementing features
• When claiming task completion
• Security audits and performance assessments
• Stuck on a problem, need an outside perspective

Don't Use When

• Still mid-implementation — finish the work first
• Doing exploratory spikes that won't be merged
• Simple typo or comment changes with no logic impact

Three Practices

Practice	When
Receiving feedback	Unclear feedback, external reviewers, needs prioritization
Requesting review	After tasks, before merge, stuck on problem
Verification gates	Before any completion claim, commit, PR
Edge case scouting	After implementation, before review

Receiving Feedback

Pattern: READ → UNDERSTAND → VERIFY → EVALUATE → RESPOND → IMPLEMENT

Rules:

• No performative agreement: "You're absolutely right!", "Great point!"
• No implementation before verification
• Restate, ask questions, push back with reasoning, or just work
• YAGNI check: search for usage before implementing "proper" features

Source handling:

• Human partner: Trusted — implement after understanding
• External reviewers: Verify technically, check for breakage, push back if wrong

Requesting Review

Process:

1. Scout edge cases first (see below)
2. Get commit SHAs: base and head
3. Dispatch ck-code-review with: WHAT, PLAN, BASE_SHA, HEAD_SHA, DESCRIPTION
4. Fix Critical immediately; fix Important before proceeding

Edge Case Scouting

When: After implementation, before requesting review

Purpose: Proactively find edge cases, side effects, and potential issues.

Process:

1. Invoke ck-scout with edge-case-focused prompt
2. Scout analyzes: affected files, data flows, error paths, boundary conditions
3. Review scout findings for potential issues
4. Address critical gaps before code review

Systematic Review Areas

Area	Focus
Structure	Organization, modularity
Logic	Correctness, edge cases from scout
Types	Safety, error handling
Performance	Bottlenecks, inefficiencies
Security	Vulnerabilities, data exposure

Prioritization

• Critical: Security vulnerabilities, data loss, breaking changes
• High: Performance issues, type safety, missing error handling
• Medium: Code smells, maintainability, docs gaps
• Low: Style, minor optimizations

Verification Gates

Iron Law: NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION EVIDENCE

Gate: IDENTIFY command → RUN full → READ output → VERIFY confirms → THEN claim

Requirements:

• Tests pass: output shows 0 failures
• Build succeeds: exit 0
• Bug fixed: original symptom passes
• Requirements met: checklist verified

Red Flags: "should"/"probably"/"seems to", satisfaction before verification, trusting agent reports

Output Format

## Code Review Summary

### Scope
- Files: [list]
- LOC: [count]
- Scout findings: [edge cases discovered]

### Overall Assessment
[Brief quality overview]

### Critical Issues
[Security, breaking changes]

### High Priority
[Performance, type safety]

### Medium Priority
[Code quality, maintainability]

### Low Priority
[Style, minor opts]

### Edge Cases Found by Scout
[Issues from scouting phase]

### Positive Observations
[Good practices noted]

### Recommended Actions
1. [Prioritized fixes]

### Unresolved Questions
[If any]

Guidelines

• Constructive, pragmatic feedback
• Acknowledge good practices
• Security best practices priority
• Verify plan TODO list completion
• Scout edge cases BEFORE reviewing