requesting-code-review – Coding skill for AI agents
Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements
Install the requesting-code-review skill with one command
Pick the tool you use, copy the command and paste it in your terminal. The skill lands in that tool's skills folder and is ready in your next session.
Claude Code
mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && curl -fsSL https://skill.dn1nguoi.com/z/requesting-code-review-7ecb1.tgz | tar xz -C ~/.claude/skills
Call it in Claude Code: /requesting-code-review – then describe the task you want done.
Codex
mkdir -p ~/.codex/skills && curl -fsSL https://skill.dn1nguoi.com/z/requesting-code-review-7ecb1.tgz | tar xz -C ~/.codex/skills
Call it in Codex: $requesting-code-review – then describe the task you want done.
Hermes Agent
mkdir -p ~/.hermes/skills && curl -fsSL https://skill.dn1nguoi.com/z/requesting-code-review-7ecb1.tgz | tar xz -C ~/.hermes/skills
Call it in Hermes Agent: /requesting-code-review – then describe the task you want done.
DeepSeek
mkdir -p ~/.deepcode/skills && curl -fsSL https://skill.dn1nguoi.com/z/requesting-code-review-7ecb1.tgz | tar xz -C ~/.deepcode/skills
Call it in DeepSeek: /requesting-code-review – then describe the task you want done.
SKILL.md content
Requesting Code Review
Use an available authorized reviewer to catch issues before they cascade. The named superpowers agent/Task API is host-specific; this guide does not grant delegation or external-code disclosure permission.
Core principle: Review early, review often.
When to Request Review
Mandatory:
- After each task in subagent-driven development
- After completing major feature
- Before merge to main
Optional but valuable:
- When stuck (fresh perspective)
- Before refactoring (baseline check)
- After fixing complex bug
How to Request
1. Get git SHAs:
BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1) # or origin/main
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)2. Dispatch code-reviewer subagent:
Use Task tool with superpowers:code-reviewer type, fill template at code-reviewer.md
Placeholders:
{WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED}- What you just built{PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS}- What it should do{BASE_SHA}- Starting commit{HEAD_SHA}- Ending commit{DESCRIPTION}- Brief summary
3. Act on feedback:
- Fix Critical issues immediately
- Fix Important issues before proceeding
- Note Minor issues for later
- Push back if reviewer is wrong (with reasoning)
Example
[Just completed Task 2: Add verification function]
You: Let me request code review before proceeding.
BASE_SHA=$(git log --oneline | grep "Task 1" | head -1 | awk '{print $1}')
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
[Dispatch superpowers:code-reviewer subagent]
WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED: Verification and repair functions for conversation index
PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from docs/plans/deployment-plan.md
BASE_SHA: a7981ec
HEAD_SHA: 3df7661
DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types
[Subagent returns]:
Strengths: Clean architecture, real tests
Issues:
Important: Missing progress indicators
Minor: Magic number (100) for reporting interval
Assessment: Ready to proceed
You: [Fix progress indicators]
[Continue to Task 3]Integration with Workflows
Subagent-Driven Development:
- Review after EACH task
- Catch issues before they compound
- Fix before moving to next task
Executing Plans:
- Review after each batch (3 tasks)
- Get feedback, apply, continue
Ad-Hoc Development:
- Review before merge
- Review when stuck
Red Flags
Never:
- Skip review because "it's simple"
- Ignore Critical issues
- Proceed with unfixed Important issues
- Argue with valid technical feedback
If reviewer wrong:
- Push back with technical reasoning
- Show code/tests that prove it works
- Request clarification
See bundled template at: [code-reviewer.md](code-reviewer.md). Use full resolved commit IDs and include dirty/untracked changes separately; HEAD-to-HEAD review does not cover them.
When to Use
This skill is applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview.
Limitations
- Use this skill only when the task clearly matches the scope described above.
- Do not treat the output as a substitute for environment-specific validation, testing, or expert review.
- Stop and ask for clarification if required inputs, permissions, safety boundaries, or success criteria are missing.
Related skills
- resolving-merge-conflicts – Use when you need to resolve an in-progress git merge/rebase conflict.
- review-and-simplify-changes – Review a git diff or explicit file scope for reuse, code quality, efficiency, clarity…
- review-animations – Use when reviewing animation and motion code against a strict craft, performance…
- review-response-generator – Review Response Generator. Use when working with review text and verified business…
- review-swarm – Parallel read-only multi-agent review of a current git diff or explicit file scope to…
- robius-app-architecture – CRITICAL: Use for Robius app architecture patterns. Triggers on: Tokio, async…
- robius-matrix-integration – CRITICAL: Use for Matrix SDK integration with Makepad. Triggers on: Matrix SDK, sliding…
- robot-framework-skill – Generates Robot Framework tests in keyword-driven syntax with Python. Supports…