[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"extension-skill-samhvw8-code-review-ja":3,"guides-for-samhvw8-code-review":217,"similar-k17aahpknkrg9v7taap7dttd158674zs":218},{"_creationTime":4,"_id":5,"children":6,"community":7,"display":9,"evaluation":20,"identity":186,"isFallback":190,"parentExtension":191,"providers":192,"relations":196,"repo":198,"workflow":214},1778054812528.7249,"k17aahpknkrg9v7taap7dttd158674zs",[],{"reviewCount":8},0,{"description":10,"installMethods":11,"name":12,"sourceUrl":13,"tags":14},"Code review practices with technical rigor and verification gates. Practices: receiving feedback, requesting reviews, verification gates. Capabilities: technical evaluation, evidence-based claims, PR review, subagent-driven review, completion verification. Actions: review, evaluate, verify, validate code changes. Keywords: code review, PR review, pull request, technical feedback, review feedback, completion claim, verification, evidence-based, code quality, review request, technical rigor, subagent review, code-reviewer, review gate, merge criteria. Use when: receiving code review feedback, completing major features, making completion claims, requesting systematic reviews, validating before merge, preventing false completion claims.",{},"Code Review","https://github.com/samhvw8/dot-claude/tree/HEAD/skills/code-review",[15,16,17,18,19],"code-review","pr-review","technical-feedback","verification","quality-gates",{"_creationTime":21,"_id":22,"extensionId":5,"locale":23,"result":24,"trustSignals":175,"workflow":184},1778054896678.329,"kn7da5vdbm3pd5qj3hev5rspan867rm4","en",{"checks":25,"evaluatedAt":165,"extensionSummary":166,"promptVersionExtension":167,"promptVersionScoring":168,"rationale":169,"score":170,"summary":171,"tags":172,"targetMarket":173,"tier":174},[26,31,34,37,41,44,49,53,56,59,63,67,70,74,77,80,83,86,89,92,95,99,103,107,111,114,117,120,124,127,130,133,136,139,143,146,149,152,155,158,162],{"category":27,"check":28,"severity":29,"summary":30},"Practical Utility","Problem relevance","pass","The description clearly states the problem of code review practices and the need for technical rigor, evidence-based claims, and verification gates, providing a concrete user problem.",{"category":27,"check":32,"severity":29,"summary":33},"Unique selling proposition","The skill offers a distinct approach to code review by emphasizing technical rigor, evidence-based claims, and verification over performative responses, going beyond a simple prompt or default LLM behavior.",{"category":27,"check":35,"severity":29,"summary":36},"Production readiness","The skill provides a comprehensive set of protocols and decision trees for various code review scenarios, covering the complete lifecycle from receiving feedback to verification gates before completion claims.",{"category":38,"check":39,"severity":29,"summary":40},"Scope","Single responsibility principle","The extension focuses on code review practices, encompassing feedback reception, review requests, and verification, which constitutes a coherent and single workflow.",{"category":38,"check":42,"severity":29,"summary":43},"Description quality","The description is concise, readable, and accurately reflects the skill's capabilities and intended use cases, aligning well with the provided SKILL.md content.",{"category":45,"check":46,"severity":47,"summary":48},"Invocation","Scoped tools","not_applicable","This skill does not expose specific tools; it guides the LLM's behavior through instructions and protocols rather than providing discrete commands.",{"category":50,"check":51,"severity":47,"summary":52},"Documentation","Configuration & parameter reference","The skill does not appear to use external configuration files or parameters that require documentation; its operation is guided by the SKILL.md and reference files.",{"category":38,"check":54,"severity":47,"summary":55},"Tool naming","As this skill primarily uses instructions and LLM guidance rather than distinct tools, tool naming conventions are not applicable.",{"category":38,"check":57,"severity":47,"summary":58},"Minimal I/O surface","The skill's operation is driven by LLM instructions and reasoning, not by explicit tool input/output schemas, making this check not applicable.",{"category":60,"check":61,"severity":47,"summary":62},"License","License usability","No license file or SPDX identifier was found in the repository or manifest, and no license information is provided in the provided context.",{"category":64,"check":65,"severity":47,"summary":66},"Maintenance","Commit recency","The repository information provided does not include commit history or a `pushedAt` date, making it impossible to assess commit recency.",{"category":64,"check":68,"severity":47,"summary":69},"Dependency Management","The skill does not appear to utilize any third-party dependencies, as indicated by the minimal file structure and lack of package manifests.",{"category":71,"check":72,"severity":29,"summary":73},"Security","Secret Management","The skill's instructions and reference files do not indicate the use or handling of secrets, and there are no apparent mechanisms for echoing resolved secret values.",{"category":71,"check":75,"severity":29,"summary":76},"Injection","The skill's content focuses on guiding LLM behavior for code review and does not involve loading external data or executing arbitrary code, thus preventing injection risks.",{"category":71,"check":78,"severity":29,"summary":79},"Transitive Supply-Chain Grenades","The skill is self-contained within the provided bundle and does not fetch remote content or execute external scripts at runtime, mitigating supply-chain risks.",{"category":71,"check":81,"severity":29,"summary":82},"Sandbox Isolation","The skill's instructions do not involve file system operations outside of the provided bundle or project context, and do not attempt to escape sandbox limitations.",{"category":71,"check":84,"severity":29,"summary":85},"Sandbox escape primitives","No detached process spawns or retry loops around denied tool calls were detected in the skill's instructions or bundled scripts.",{"category":71,"check":87,"severity":29,"summary":88},"Data Exfiltration","The skill's instructions do not contain any imperative commands or references to reading and submitting confidential data to third parties.",{"category":71,"check":90,"severity":29,"summary":91},"Hidden Text Tricks","The bundled files (SKILL.md and reference files) are free of hidden-steering tricks, invisible Unicode characters, or other obfuscation methods.",{"category":71,"check":93,"severity":29,"summary":94},"Opaque code execution","The skill's content is plain, readable Markdown and does not involve obfuscated code, base64 payloads, `eval`, or runtime script fetching.",{"category":96,"check":97,"severity":29,"summary":98},"Portability","Structural Assumption","The skill guides the LLM's behavior and does not make assumptions about the user's specific project file organization outside of the bundle.",{"category":100,"check":101,"severity":47,"summary":102},"Trust","Issues Attention","No GitHub issues data was provided for this repository.",{"category":104,"check":105,"severity":47,"summary":106},"Versioning","Release Management","No version information was found in the provided metadata or files.",{"category":108,"check":109,"severity":47,"summary":110},"Code Execution","Validation","The skill guides LLM behavior rather than executing code with structured inputs/outputs, making schema validation checks not applicable.",{"category":71,"check":112,"severity":29,"summary":113},"Unguarded Destructive Operations","The skill focuses on guiding LLM behavior for code review and does not involve destructive operations like file deletion or system changes.",{"category":108,"check":115,"severity":29,"summary":116},"Error Handling","The skill provides clear protocols and rules for LLM behavior, including how to handle unclear feedback or situations where verification is impossible, guiding the LLM to report appropriately rather than failing silently.",{"category":108,"check":118,"severity":47,"summary":119},"Logging","The skill guides LLM behavior and does not perform actions that would typically require local audit logging.",{"category":121,"check":122,"severity":29,"summary":123},"Compliance","GDPR","The skill's focus on code review and technical evaluation does not involve processing personal data.",{"category":121,"check":125,"severity":29,"summary":126},"Target market","The skill's principles and practices for code review are universally applicable and do not contain region-specific logic or content.",{"category":96,"check":128,"severity":29,"summary":129},"Runtime stability","The skill's instructions are primarily LLM-guided and do not make assumptions about specific operating systems, shells, or Claude Code runtime environments beyond general LLM capabilities.",{"category":45,"check":131,"severity":29,"summary":132},"Precise Purpose","The description clearly defines the skill's purpose (code review practices with technical rigor) and its triggers (receiving feedback, requesting reviews, verification gates), and includes explicit boundaries.",{"category":45,"check":134,"severity":29,"summary":135},"Concise Frontmatter","The frontmatter is dense, clearly summarizes the core capability, and includes specific trigger phrases without excessive keywords.",{"category":50,"check":137,"severity":29,"summary":138},"Concise Body","The SKILL.md body is concise, well-structured, and delegates detailed protocols to separate reference files, adhering to progressive disclosure principles.",{"category":140,"check":141,"severity":29,"summary":142},"Context","Progressive Disclosure","Detailed protocols for feedback reception, review requests, and verification gates are appropriately split into separate reference files and linked from the main SKILL.md.",{"category":140,"check":144,"severity":47,"summary":145},"Forked exploration","This skill guides LLM behavior and does not involve deep exploration or auditing that would necessitate `context: fork`.",{"category":27,"check":147,"severity":29,"summary":148},"Usage examples","The skill provides clear examples within the reference files and SKILL.md that illustrate how to use the protocols, including input, invocation steps, and expected outcomes.",{"category":27,"check":150,"severity":29,"summary":151},"Edge cases","The skill handles edge cases such as unclear feedback, external reviewers, and the need for verification before completion claims, providing clear protocols and recovery steps.",{"category":108,"check":153,"severity":47,"summary":154},"Tool Fallback","The skill does not rely on external tools like an MCP server; its functionality is driven by LLM instructions and internal logic.",{"category":96,"check":156,"severity":29,"summary":157},"Stack assumptions","The skill's instructions are LLM-agnostic and do not assume specific programming languages, frameworks, or operating systems.",{"category":159,"check":160,"severity":29,"summary":161},"Safety","Halt on unexpected state","The skill's protocols instruct the LLM to halt and report on unexpected pre-states or unclear feedback, ensuring a controlled workflow.",{"category":96,"check":163,"severity":29,"summary":164},"Cross-skill coupling","The skill is self-contained and focuses on code review practices without implicitly relying on or performing tasks belonging to other skills.",1778054841894,"This skill guides users through three core code review practices: receiving feedback, requesting reviews via a subagent, and implementing verification gates before completion claims. It emphasizes technical correctness, evidence, and systematic processes, with detailed protocols for each scenario.","2.0.0","3.4.0","The extension is highly polished and well-documented, adhering to best practices for LLM-guided skills. All checks passed or were not applicable, indicating a robust and reliable implementation.",98,"This skill provides rigorous guidance for code review practices, emphasizing technical evaluation and evidence-based claims over performative responses.",[15,16,17,18,19],"global","verified",{"codeQuality":176,"collectedAt":177,"documentation":178,"maintenance":180,"security":181,"testCoverage":183},{},1778054826159,{"descriptionLength":179,"readmeSize":8},742,{},{"hasNpmPackage":182,"smitheryVerified":182},false,{"hasCi":182,"hasTests":182},{"updatedAt":185},1778054896678,{"githubOwner":187,"githubRepo":188,"locale":23,"slug":15,"type":189},"samhvw8","dot-claude","skill",true,null,{"extract":193,"llm":195},{"commitSha":194,"license":47},"28c76162116d2eedab131c0e1548fdc76a2999f7",{"promptVersionExtension":167,"promptVersionScoring":168,"score":170,"targetMarket":173,"tier":174},{"repoId":197},"kd79ad9dpqazy79y2s6rvajgjn865xek",{"_creationTime":199,"_id":197,"identity":200,"providers":202,"workflow":211},1777995558409.872,{"githubOwner":187,"githubRepo":188,"sourceUrl":201},"https://github.com/samhvw8/dot-claude",{"discover":203,"github":206},{"sources":204},[205],"skills-sh",{"closedIssues90d":8,"forks":8,"openIssues90d":207,"pushedAt":208,"readmeSize":8,"stars":209,"topics":210},1,1765248784000,10,[],{"discoverAt":212,"extractAt":213,"githubAt":213,"updatedAt":213},1777995558409,1778054814968,{"anyEnrichmentAt":215,"extractAt":216,"githubAt":215,"llmAt":185,"updatedAt":185},1778054813688,1778054812528,[],[219,249,277,306,324,351],{"_creationTime":220,"_id":221,"community":222,"display":223,"identity":233,"providers":237,"relations":243,"workflow":245},1778053327521.585,"k17eftejnaapgr7mnfajqgng2h866syh",{"reviewCount":8},{"description":224,"installMethods":225,"name":226,"sourceUrl":227,"tags":228},"Systematic fact verification and misinformation identification using evidence-based analysis. Use when: verifying claims, checking facts, identifying misinformation, evaluating source credibility, or when user asks to \"fact check\", \"verify\", \"is this true\", or mentions claims that need validation.",{},"Fact Checker","https://github.com/shubhamsaboo/awesome-llm-apps/tree/HEAD/awesome_agent_skills/fact-checker",[229,230,18,231,232],"fact-checking","misinformation","llm-skill","analysis",{"githubOwner":234,"githubRepo":235,"locale":23,"slug":236,"type":189},"shubhamsaboo","awesome-llm-apps","fact-checker",{"extract":238,"llm":241},{"commitSha":239,"license":240},"a35897449fe8b0fab12e8f0fd9f2e2a40e872ab7","MIT",{"promptVersionExtension":167,"promptVersionScoring":168,"score":242,"targetMarket":173,"tier":174},100,{"repoId":244},"kd73kvct1kme7748mpsbddhhmx865wd3",{"anyEnrichmentAt":246,"extractAt":247,"githubAt":246,"llmAt":248,"updatedAt":248},1778053329769,1778053327521,1778053376632,{"_creationTime":250,"_id":251,"community":252,"display":253,"identity":263,"providers":267,"relations":271,"workflow":273},1778053622473.659,"k175v48mt9fzh8r2mm6ra7m5gs867jav",{"reviewCount":8},{"description":254,"installMethods":255,"name":256,"sourceUrl":257,"tags":258},"Verify claims in generated output against sources. Use as a separate pass AFTER content generation to catch hallucinations. Critical constraint - cannot be reliably combined with generation in a single pass.",{},"Fact-Check Skill","https://github.com/jwynia/agent-skills/tree/HEAD/skills/general/research/verification/fact-check",[18,259,260,261,262],"research","hallucination","documentation","safety",{"githubOwner":264,"githubRepo":265,"locale":23,"slug":266,"type":189},"jwynia","agent-skills","fact-check",{"extract":268,"llm":270},{"commitSha":269,"license":240},"e02ec7e226a6e4f8419fd3b88a1d8e472d421b32",{"promptVersionExtension":167,"promptVersionScoring":168,"score":170,"targetMarket":173,"tier":174},{"repoId":272},"kd7efn3mprpa8rd8vm5hw5ebzx864fph",{"anyEnrichmentAt":274,"extractAt":275,"githubAt":274,"llmAt":276,"updatedAt":276},1778053625386,1778053622473,1778054012696,{"_creationTime":278,"_id":279,"community":280,"display":281,"identity":291,"providers":295,"relations":300,"workflow":302},1778054741404.8755,"k17f34v6c7vmvgxab7k2xy2xrh8666t8",{"reviewCount":8},{"description":282,"installMethods":283,"name":284,"sourceUrl":285,"tags":286},"Expert code review of current git changes with a senior engineer lens. Detects SOLID violations, security risks, and proposes actionable improvements.",{},"Code Review Expert","https://github.com/sanyuan0704/sanyuan-skills/tree/HEAD/skills/code-review-expert",[15,287,288,289,290],"git","security","development","quality-assurance",{"githubOwner":292,"githubRepo":293,"locale":23,"slug":294,"type":189},"sanyuan0704","sanyuan-skills","code-review-expert",{"extract":296,"llm":298},{"commitSha":297,"license":240},"807460aaa6e23313d9e16c397d100130691083a5",{"promptVersionExtension":167,"promptVersionScoring":168,"score":299,"targetMarket":173,"tier":174},95,{"repoId":301},"kd7ehbmfr6fxv4k4d6h65hev89864gmz",{"anyEnrichmentAt":303,"extractAt":304,"githubAt":303,"llmAt":305,"updatedAt":305},1778054741686,1778054741404,1778054758790,{"_creationTime":307,"_id":308,"community":309,"display":310,"identity":318,"providers":319,"relations":322,"workflow":323},1778053622473.6633,"k17f6c56hvc1a5qd3v1sra4491866m80",{"reviewCount":8},{"description":311,"installMethods":312,"name":313,"sourceUrl":314,"tags":315},"Provide structured code review guidance for catching defects and improving quality. This skill should be used when the user asks to 'review this code', 'check for issues', 'PR review', 'code quality check', or wants systematic code evaluation. Keywords: code review, PR, pull request, quality, defects, security, maintainability, performance.",{},"Code Review Diagnostic","https://github.com/jwynia/agent-skills/tree/HEAD/skills/tech/development/quality/code-review",[15,316,289,261,317],"quality","guidance",{"githubOwner":264,"githubRepo":265,"locale":23,"slug":15,"type":189},{"extract":320,"llm":321},{"commitSha":269,"license":240},{"promptVersionExtension":167,"promptVersionScoring":168,"score":299,"targetMarket":173,"tier":174},{"repoId":272},{"anyEnrichmentAt":274,"extractAt":275,"githubAt":274,"llmAt":276,"updatedAt":276},{"_creationTime":325,"_id":326,"community":327,"display":328,"identity":335,"providers":339,"relations":344,"workflow":346},1778003598032.4702,"k171eqh7h0g7m0vbv31zbef4s9865eys",{"reviewCount":8},{"description":329,"installMethods":330,"name":331,"sourceUrl":332,"tags":333},"Reviews pull requests and code changes for quality, security, and best practices. Use when user asks for code review, PR review, or mentions reviewing changes.",{},"Code Reviewer","https://github.com/charon-fan/agent-playbook/tree/HEAD/skills/code-reviewer",[15,287,316,288,334,261],"python",{"githubOwner":336,"githubRepo":337,"locale":23,"slug":338,"type":189},"charon-fan","agent-playbook","code-reviewer",{"extract":340,"llm":342,"smithery":343},{"commitSha":341,"license":240},"e55b839c0f44a451978db68d514746c02e9fd685",{"promptVersionExtension":167,"promptVersionScoring":168,"score":299,"targetMarket":173,"tier":174},{"qualityScore":8,"totalActivations":8,"uniqueUsers":8,"useCount":8,"verified":182},{"repoId":345},"kd74py7wryfvt7pe7w2t639r2n865aqv",{"anyEnrichmentAt":347,"extractAt":348,"githubAt":349,"llmAt":350,"smitheryAt":347,"updatedAt":350},1778016861516,1778003607849,1778003611416,1778016883287,{"_creationTime":352,"_id":353,"community":354,"display":355,"identity":361,"providers":363,"relations":366,"workflow":367},1778053622473.6584,"k1713jxcqmcxt0qc8j638d84298664ax",{"reviewCount":8},{"description":356,"installMethods":357,"name":358,"sourceUrl":359,"tags":360},"Systematically investigate social media claims and viral content. Use when fact-checking complex claims, when decomposing multi-part assertions, or when investigating narratives that mix facts with interpretation.",{},"Claim Investigation","https://github.com/jwynia/agent-skills/tree/HEAD/skills/general/research/verification/claim-investigation",[259,18,229,232,261],{"githubOwner":264,"githubRepo":265,"locale":23,"slug":362,"type":189},"claim-investigation",{"extract":364,"llm":365},{"commitSha":269,"license":240},{"promptVersionExtension":167,"promptVersionScoring":168,"score":299,"targetMarket":173,"tier":174},{"repoId":272},{"anyEnrichmentAt":274,"extractAt":275,"githubAt":274,"llmAt":276,"updatedAt":276}]