Skill4k repo starsupdated 3d ago
skill-staged-review
Use when a PR or feature needs both specification and code-quality review
Install in Claude Code
Copygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/nyldn/claude-octopus /tmp/skill-staged-review && cp -r /tmp/skill-staged-review/.claude/skills/skill-staged-review ~/.claude/skills/skill-staged-reviewThen start a new Claude Code session; the skill loads automatically.
Definition
SKILL.md
# Two-Stage Review Pipeline
Separates **spec compliance** (did you build the right thing?) from **code quality**
(did you build it right?). Stage 1 must pass before Stage 2 runs.
---
## Stage 1: Spec Compliance
Validates the implementation against the intent contract.
### Step 1: Load Intent Contract
```bash
INTENT_FILE=".claude/session-intent.md"
if [[ -f "$INTENT_FILE" ]]; then
echo "Intent contract found: $INTENT_FILE"
cat "$INTENT_FILE"
else
echo "WARNING: No intent contract found at $INTENT_FILE"
echo "Skipping Stage 1 — proceeding to Stage 2 (code quality) only."
fi
```
**If no intent contract exists:** Warn the user and skip to Stage 2. Do NOT fabricate
success criteria — the contract must exist from a prior workflow.
### Step 2: Validate Success Criteria
For each success criterion in the intent contract:
1. **Read the criterion** from the `## Success Criteria` section
2. **Find evidence** in the codebase that the criterion is met
3. **Mark status:**
- `[PASS]` — Evidence confirms criterion is met
- `[FAIL]` — Evidence shows criterion is NOT met
- `[PARTIAL]` — Partially met, gaps identified
Present results:
```markdown
## Stage 1: Spec Compliance
### Success Criteria Check
#### Good Enough Criteria
- [PASS] Criterion 1: <how it was met>
- [FAIL] Criterion 2: <why not met, what's missing>
#### Exceptional Criteria
- [PARTIAL] Criterion 1: <what's done, what's remaining>
```
### Step 3: Validate Boundaries
For each boundary in the intent contract:
1. **Read the boundary** from the `## Boundaries` section
2. **Check for violations** in the implementation
3. **Mark status:**
- `[RESPECTED]` — No violations found
- `[VIOLATED]` — Implementation crosses the boundary
```markdown
### Boundary Check
- [RESPECTED] Boundary 1: <confirmation>
- [VIOLATED] Boundary 2: <what violated it>
```
### Step 4: Stage 1 Gate
| Result | Action |
|--------|--------|
| All criteria PASS + all boundaries RESPECTED | Proceed to Stage 2 |
| Any criterion FAIL | Report failures. Ask user: fix now or proceed anyway? |
| Any boundary VIOLATED | Report violations. Ask user: fix now or proceed anyway? |
**If user chooses to fix:** Stop review, list specific fixes needed.
**If user chooses to proceed:** Note the overrides and continue to Stage 2.
---
## Stage 2: Code Quality
Runs stub detection and full code quality review.
### Step 1: Stub Detection
Run 5 checks on all changed files:
```bash
# Get changed files
if git diff --cached --name-only 2>/dev/null | head -1 > /dev/null; then
changed_files=$(git diff --cached --name-only)
elif git diff --name-only HEAD~1..HEAD 2>/dev/null | head -1 > /dev/null; then
changed_files=$(git diff --name-only HEAD~1..HEAD)
else
changed_files=$(git diff --name-only)
fi
# Filter source files
source_files=$(echo "$changed_files" | grep -E "\.(ts|tsx|js|jsx|py|go|rs|sh)$" || true)
STUB_ISSUES=0
for file in $source_files; do
[[ -f "$file" ]] || continue
# Check 1: TODO/FIXME/PLACEHOLDER markers
todo_count=$(grep -cE "(TODO|FIXME|PLACEHOLDER|XXX)" "$file" 2>/dev/null || echo "0")
if [[ "$todo_count" -gt 0 ]]; then
echo "WARNING: $file has $todo_count TODO/FIXME markers"
STUB_ISSUES=$((STUB_ISSUES + 1))
fi
# Check 2: Empty function bodies
empty_fn=$(grep -cE "function.*\{\s*\}|=>\s*\{\s*\}" "$file" 2>/dev/null || echo "0")
if [[ "$empty_fn" -gt 0 ]]; then
echo "ERROR: $file has $empty_fn empty functions"
STUB_ISSUES=$((STUB_ISSUES + 1))
fi
# Check 3: Suspicious null/undefined returns
null_ret=$(grep -cE "return (null|undefined);" "$file" 2>/dev/null || echo "0")
if [[ "$null_ret" -gt 0 ]]; then
echo "WARNING: $file has $null_ret null/undefined returns — verify intentional"
STUB_ISSUES=$((STUB_ISSUES + 1))
fi
# Check 4: Substantive line count
subst_lines=$(grep -cvE "^\s*(//|/\*|\*|#|import|export|$)" "$file" 2>/dev/null || echo "0")
if [[ "$subst_lines" -lt 5 ]]; then
echo "WARNING: $file has only $subst_lines substantive lines"
STUB_ISSUES=$((STUB_ISSUES + 1))
fi
# Check 5: Mock/test data in production code
mock_count=$(grep -cE "const.*(mock|test|dummy|fake).*=" "$file" 2>/dev/null || echo "0")
if [[ "$mock_count" -gt 0 ]]; then
echo "WARNING: $file has $mock_count mock/test data references"
STUB_ISSUES=$((STUB_ISSUES + 1))
fi
done
echo "Stub detection complete: $STUB_ISSUES issues found"
```
### Step 2: Multi-LLM Quality Review (RECOMMENDED)
**After stub detection, dispatch code to multiple providers for parallel quality review.** A Claude-only review pipeline misses what external models catch — Codex excels at logic errors and correctness, while Antigravity provides an independent security and edge-case analysis. Using both produces higher-confidence findings.
**Check provider availability and dispatch in parallel:**
```bash
# Get the diff for review
DIFF_CONTENT=$(git diff --cached 2>/dev/null || git diff HEAD~1..HEAD 2>/dev/null || git diff)
```
**If external providers are available — dispatch focused reviews through Octopus routing:**
```bash
providers=()
command -v codex >/dev/null 2>&1 && providers+=(codex)
command -v agy >/dev/null 2>&1 && providers+=(agy)
for provider in "${providers[@]}"; do
safe_provider=$(printf '%s' "$provider" | tr -c '[:alnum:]_-' '_')
"${HOME}/.claude-octopus/plugin/scripts/orchestrate.sh" spawn "$provider" \
"Review this code diff for LOGIC, CORRECTNESS, and SECURITY issues. Focus on:
1. Logic bugs and off-by-one errors
2. Unhandled error paths
3. Race conditions or concurrency issues
4. Incorrect type handling or implicit coercions
5. Security issues at trust boundaries
Report ONLY high-confidence issues. Do NOT flag style preferences.
DIFF:
${DIFF_CONTENT}" > "/tmp/octopus-review-${safe_provider}.md" 2>/dev/null &
done
```
**Wait for external reviews to complete, then synthesize all findings from Claude plus available external providers into a unified quality assessment.** If external pMore from this repository
backend-architectSubagent
Backend architect. Delegate only when the user explicitly starts an Octopus workflow.
cloud-architectSubagent
Cloud architect. Delegate only when the user explicitly starts an Octopus workflow.
code-reviewerSubagent
Code reviewer. Delegate only when the user explicitly starts an Octopus workflow.
database-architectSubagent
Database architect. Delegate only when the user explicitly starts an Octopus workflow.
debuggerSubagent
Debugger. Delegate only when the user explicitly starts an Octopus workflow.
docs-architectSubagent
Documentation architect. Delegate only when the user explicitly starts an Octopus workflow.
frontend-developerSubagent
Frontend developer. Delegate only when the user explicitly starts an Octopus workflow.
performance-engineerSubagent
Performance engineer. Delegate only when the user explicitly starts an Octopus workflow.