structured-code-review

A five-stage method for reviewing code against requirements, correctness, quality, testing, security, and performance. It labels findings by severity and includes reasons and suggested actions.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it for code reviews and pull requests, especially when you need to check requirements, edge cases, error handling, tests, unfinished work, security, and performance.
Why use it?
It separates different kinds of review checks, helping reduce missed bugs, untested cases, security risks, and changes that do not match the requested work.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Install

Getting it into your agent

One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/rohitg00/skillkit/structured-review
Any agent
npx skills add rohitg00/skillkit --skill structured-review
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/rohitg00/skillkit

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Per session 112 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,186 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

What it costs to keep this loaded

Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00112 $0.01186
Opus 5 $0.00056 $0.00593
Sonnet 5 $0.00022 $0.00237
Haiku 4.5 $0.00011 $0.00119

Measured 3d ago against content hash cdedab8780f6, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

structured-code-review scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 3d ago.

A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.

Nothing flagged

None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.

packages/core/src/methodology/packs/collaboration/structured-review/SKILL.md · 178 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 178 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Structured Code Review

You are performing a structured, multi-stage code review. This methodology ensures thorough review while providing actionable, constructive feedback.

Core Principle

Review in stages. Each stage has a specific focus. Don't mix concerns.

A structured review catches more issues and provides better feedback than an unstructured scan.

Review Stages

Stage 1: Requirements Compliance

First, verify the code meets its requirements.

Checklist:

  • Implements stated requirements
  • Handles specified edge cases
  • No scope creep (unexpected additions)
  • No missing functionality

Feedback at this stage:

  • "This doesn't appear to handle the case when X is empty"
  • "The requirement specified Y, but this implements Z"
  • "This adds feature F which wasn't requested - is that intentional?"

Stage 2: Correctness

Next, verify the code works correctly.

Checklist:

  • Logic is sound
  • No obvious bugs
  • Error paths are handled
  • No unfinished code (TODOs without tickets)

Feedback at this stage:

  • "This will throw if user is null"
  • "The loop exits early before processing all items"
  • "What happens when the API call fails?"

Stage 3: Code Quality

Then, evaluate code quality and maintainability.

Checklist:

  • Clear naming
  • Reasonable function/method length
  • No unnecessary complexity
  • Follows project conventions
  • Appropriate abstractions

Feedback at this stage:

  • "Could you rename data to userProfile for clarity?"
  • "This function is doing three things - consider splitting"
  • "We use camelCase for variables in this project"

Stage 4: Testing

Evaluate test coverage and quality.

Checklist:

  • New code has tests
  • Tests cover main paths and edge cases
  • Tests are readable and maintainable
  • Tests don't test implementation details

Feedback at this stage:

  • "Please add a test for the error case"
  • "This test will break if we change the implementation"
  • "Consider using a parameterized test for these cases"

Read the full file on GitHub · 178 lines

Changes

What this file has done since we first saw it

Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.

  1. 3d ago First seen · 178 lines · 112 tokens per session scan A cdedab8780f6

Subscribe to this mod's changes

structured-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository rohitg00/skillkit (1,477 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 112 tokens to every session and 1,186 once invoked, about $0.0006 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

workflows-create

Create a durable Zapier workflow from natural language using @zapier/zapier-durable and the Zapier SDK CLI. Use when the user wants to build a Zapier workflow, create an automation, write a durable workflow, build me a Zap that, create a durable that, or automate a multi-step process involving Zapier-connected apps.

zapier/agent-skills · 73 tokens

workflows-modify

Modify and republish an existing durable workflow using the Zapier SDK experimental Code Workflows commands. Use when the user asks to fix my Zap, update my Zap, modify my workflow, repair this Zap, or edit a deployed Zapier workflow.

zapier/agent-skills · 54 tokens

workflows-list

List durable workflows in the authenticated Zapier account using the Zapier SDK experimental Code Workflows commands. Use when the user asks to list my Zaps, show my durable workflows, what workflows do I have, or see what Zapier workflows are deployed.

zapier/agent-skills · 55 tokens

workflows-history

Show run history for a specific durable workflow using the Zapier SDK experimental Code Workflows commands. Use when the user asks for run history, execution history, what happened with this Zap, or how a workflow fired.

zapier/agent-skills · 47 tokens

apple-cleanup

Exhaustive engineering hardening of an iOS app. Reviews for Swift 6 compliance, crash risks, App Store rejection risks, and tech debt; builds a surgical plan; dispatches parallel subagents to fix all P0-P2 issues; then pushes an alpha to TestFlight. Use for pre-submission cleanup and code hardening, not design polish.

markdavidgan/apple-dev-skills · 77 tokens

apple-review

Comprehensive Apple-grade review of an iOS app covering design (Apple design leader perspective), engineering (architecture and code quality), compliance (App Store rejection risks), and keynote readiness (product story and demo quality). Use when asked for a full app review, Apple-quality audit, design critique, HIG…

markdavidgan/apple-dev-skills · 88 tokens