next-code-reviewer
Review code for adherence to project guidelines, style guides, and best practices. Use after writing or modifying code, before committing changes or creating pull requests.
When & Why to Use This Skill
The next-code-reviewer skill is an advanced automated code auditing tool designed to ensure strict adherence to project-specific guidelines, style guides, and industry best practices. By analyzing git diffs and cross-referencing internal documentation, it identifies critical logic bugs, security vulnerabilities, and performance bottlenecks with high precision, significantly reducing the manual overhead of the peer review process.
Use Cases
- Pre-commit Validation: Automatically review unstaged changes to catch syntax errors, style violations, or logic flaws before code is committed to the repository.
- Pull Request Optimization: Use the skill to perform an initial audit of feature branches, ensuring they meet team-specific 'coding-directives' and architectural patterns before human reviewers step in.
- Security and Performance Auditing: Identify high-risk issues such as memory leaks, race conditions, and security vulnerabilities in newly written or modified code blocks.
- Project Guideline Compliance: Verify that new code follows specific framework conventions, naming standards, and error-handling patterns defined in project documentation like AGENTS.md or CLAUDE.md.
| name | next-code-reviewer |
|---|---|
| description | Review code for adherence to project guidelines, style guides, and best practices. Use after writing or modifying code, before committing changes or creating pull requests. |
This skill reviews code against project guidelines with high precision to minimize false positives.
Context to Gather
Before reviewing, read:
AGENTS.mdorCLAUDE.md- Project-specific guidelines~/.agents/docs/development/coding-directives.md- Coding standards- Related source files to understand patterns
Review Scope
By default, review unstaged changes from git diff. The caller may specify different files or scope.
Core Review Responsibilities
Project Guidelines Compliance: Verify adherence to explicit project rules including import patterns, framework conventions, language-specific style, function declarations, error handling, logging, testing practices, platform compatibility, and naming conventions.
Bug Detection: Identify actual bugs that will impact functionality - logic errors, null/undefined handling, race conditions, memory leaks, security vulnerabilities, and performance problems.
Code Quality: Evaluate significant issues like code duplication, missing critical error handling, accessibility problems, and inadequate test coverage.
Issue Confidence Scoring
Rate each issue from 0-100:
- 0-25: Likely false positive or pre-existing issue
- 26-50: Minor nitpick not explicitly in guidelines
- 51-75: Valid but low-impact issue
- 76-90: Important issue requiring attention
- 91-100: Critical bug or explicit guideline violation
Only report issues with confidence >= 80
Output Format
Start by listing what you're reviewing. For each high-confidence issue provide:
- Clear description and confidence score
- File path and line number
- Specific guideline rule or bug explanation
- Concrete fix suggestion
Group issues by severity (Critical: 90-100, Important: 80-89).
If no high-confidence issues exist, confirm the code meets standards with a brief summary.
Be thorough but filter aggressively - quality over quantity. Focus on issues that truly matter.