Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

bug-review(错误审查)

bug-review 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

bug-review 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为需要联网;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描有提醒项,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,674 个 Skill 里排第 36,315。

总安装 1,947周安装 78GitHub Stars 131下载 630核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
unknown

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:bug-review(错误审查)
来源仓库:https://github.com/pproenca/dot-skills
仓库路径:skills/bug-review
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/pproenca/dot-skills --skill bug-review
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/pproenca/dot-skills --skill bug-review

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

bug-review 执行五轮独立代码审查并通过多数投票机制生成高质量评审意见。适用于 Pull Request 合并前的质量门禁,特别关注 bug 与安全类问题的检出率。持续学习已解决问题类型以提升未来检出效能,形成闭环优化机制。可选择自动生成 autofix commit 加速修复周期,但需人工复核关键变更安全性。

bug-review 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

来源仓库内路径:skills/bug-review

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 npx skills add https://github.com/pproenca/dot-skills --skill bug-review;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要需要联网,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

bug-review 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/pproenca/dot-skills --skill bug-review。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

bug-review 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

bug-review 需要什么权限?

权限级别是需要联网。该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

bug-review 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

bug-review 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 1,947 次,近一周安装 78 次,下载 630 次,GitHub 131 星。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

bug-review 安全吗?

第三方扫描有提醒项,说明存在需要人工确认的行为。安装前请打开源码看清它读了什么、联网到哪里。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。

先想清楚的地方

  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方扫描存在提醒项或未通过项,需要人工逐条确认。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 Codex,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。

不太适合

  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
bug-review

错误审查 · 本页

1,947131需要联网未明确有提醒

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

Bug Review v2

Multi-pass PR review agent with 5 parallel review passes, majority voting, independent Opus validation, and resolution rate learning. Posts inline PR comments and optionally generates autofix commits. Tracks whether findings get resolved at merge time and uses that signal to improve future reviews.

When to Apply

  • User asks to review a pull request for bugs or correctness issues
  • User runs /bug-review <PR-number-or-URL>
  • User runs /bug-review:resolve <PR> to classify resolutions after merge
  • User runs /bug-review:report for resolution rate statistics
  • User asks for code review focused on logic errors, edge cases, or security
  • User wants to find bugs in a diff or set of changes

Setup

On first run, verify:

  • gh CLI is installed and authenticated (gh auth status)
  • Current directory is a git repo with a GitHub remote
  • jq is installed (for JSON processing)
  • bc is installed (for resolution rate calculations; pre-installed on most systems)

Read config.json for configuration (passes, vote threshold, models, category weights).

Workflow Overview

/bug-review <PR>
  |
  v
Fetch PR context + gather-context.sh
  |
  v
5 parallel passes (shuffled diffs, Sonnet) --> Aggregate & vote (3/5 majority)
  |
  v
Independent Opus validator --> Dedup --> Present findings --> Post + store
  |
  (later, after merge)
  v
/bug-review:resolve <PR> --> Classify resolutions --> Update category weights

Command: /bug-review

Step 1: Parse Input & Fetch Context

  1. Parse the PR identifier (number, URL, or branch name)
  2. Check cache: Look for ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_DATA}/bug-review/cache/pr-{N}/ — if cache exists for the same head commit, offer to resume from the last checkpoint
  3. Run scripts/fetch-pr.sh <pr-identifier> to get PR diff + metadata as JSON
  4. Save the diff to a temp file for shuffling
  5. Run scripts/gather-context.sh <changed-files-json> to get prioritized context (callers, types, tests, repo rules)
  6. Read .bug-review.md from repo root if it exists
  7. Save checkpoint: Write context to ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_DATA}/bug-review/cache/pr-{N}/context.json

Step 2: Run 5 Parallel Review Passes

For each pass (1-5), prepare a shuffled diff:

scripts/shuffle-diff.sh <pass-number> < pr.diff > pass-<N>.diff

Launch 5 Agent subprocesses in parallel. Read review-passes.md for the exact prompt for each pass.

  • Pass 1: Logic & Edge Cases (seed 1)
  • Pass 2: Security & Data Integrity (seed 2)
  • Pass 3: Error Handling & API Contracts (seed 3)
  • Pass 4: Concurrency & State (seed 4)
  • Pass 5: Data Flow & Contracts (seed 5)

Use model from config.json agent_model (default: "sonnet").

Each agent returns a JSON array of findings.

Save checkpoint: Write all pass results to ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_DATA}/bug-review/cache/pr-{N}/pass-results.json

Step 3: Aggregate & Vote

  1. Collect findings from all 5 passes
  2. Group findings by similarity: same file + line within +/-5 + same or related category
  3. Count votes per group
  4. Keep only findings with 3+ votes (majority of 5, configurable via vote_threshold)
  5. Apply category weights from config.json: final_score = votes × severity_weight × category_weight
  6. Categories with weight < 0.1 are suppressed entirely
  7. Rank by final_score descending

If only 1-2 passes found bugs and the others found none, present findings but note they lack consensus.

Save checkpoint: Write voted findings to cache.

Step 4: Independent Validation (Opus)

Launch a separate Agent using validator_model from config.json (default: "opus").

This agent has NOT seen the review passes. It receives only the voted findings and the original code. Read the Validator section in review-passes.md for the prompt.

For each finding, the validator outputs: {id, verdict: "KEEP"|"DISCARD", confidence, reasoning}

Remove DISCARDed findings. Multiply each finding's score by the validator's confidence.

Compute each finding's final confidence field:

confidence = (votes / total_passes) × validator_confidence

Findings with confidence < 0.5 are shown with a "low confidence" warning.

Save checkpoint: Write validated findings to cache.

Step 5: Dedup Against Prior Reviews

Run scripts/dedup.sh <pr-number> to get existing [bug-review] comments. Match by location proximity (file + line within +/-10) and category — not text similarity.

Step 6: Present Findings to User

Display a table:

#SeverityConfidenceFileLineTitleVotes

For each finding, show full description, trigger scenario, suggested fix, and validator reasoning.

Ask the user (using AskUserQuestion with multiSelect):

  • Which findings to post as PR comments (default: all)
  • Which findings to autofix (default: none)

If no findings survived voting + validation: "No bugs found across 5 review passes. The changes look clean."

Step 7a: Post PR Review

Write approved findings to a temporary JSON file, then run:

scripts/post-review.sh <pr-number> <findings-json-file>

Then persist findings for resolution tracking:

scripts/store-findings.sh <pr-number> <findings-json-file> <head-commit-sha>

Step 7b: Autofix (User-Selected Findings)

For each finding selected for autofix:

  1. Read the file and understand surrounding context
  2. Generate a minimal fix (smallest possible change)
  3. Apply the fix using the Edit tool
  4. Scope check: Run git diff --stat — verify only the finding's file was modified and diff is under 20 lines. If exceeded, revert and warn.
  5. Run existing tests if available (npm test, go test./..., pytest, etc.)
  6. If tests pass: commit with fix: {title} [bug-review]
  7. If tests fail: revert the fix (git checkout -- <file>) and report to user
  8. After all fixes: push to the PR branch

Safety: one commit per fix, run tests between fixes, never force-push, scope-validate every fix.

Command: /bug-review:resolve

Run after a PR is merged to classify whether findings were resolved.

  1. Run scripts/classify-resolutions.sh <pr-number>

- Loads stored findings from ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_DATA}/bug-review/findings/pr-{N}.json - Checks if PR is merged - For each finding: diffs code between review commit and merge commit - Classifies each as RESOLVED, UNRESOLVED, or INCONCLUSIVE - Updates the stored findings file with resolution data

  1. Display resolution summary to user
  2. If enough data accumulated (10+ findings, 3+ PRs): run scripts/update-weights.sh to adjust category weights

Command: /bug-review:report

Display resolution rate statistics across all tracked PRs.

Run scripts/resolution-report.sh which outputs:

  • Overall resolution rate
  • Resolution rate by severity
  • Resolution rate by category (sorted worst-first to highlight noisy categories)
  • Suppressed categories (weight < 0.1)

Repo-Specific Rules (.bug-review.md)

Teams can create .bug-review.md at their repo root:

## Focus Areas
- Pay special attention to authentication flows
- Check all database queries for SQL injection

## Ignore
- Don't flag issues in generated files (*.generated.ts)
- Ignore style-only concerns

## Invariants
- All API endpoints must check req.user before accessing user data
- Database migrations must be reversible

## Severity Overrides
- Treat any auth bypass as CRITICAL regardless of category default

How to Use

Read workflow.md for detailed step-by-step with error handling. Read review-passes.md for all 5 review pass prompts and the validator. Read categories.md for bug categories and learned weights.

Related Skills

  • Consider creating a Runbook skill for investigating bugs found by this review
  • Consider creating a CI/CD skill to run this review automatically on PR open

平台分布

Codex

32.79%
按下载量换算207

Claude

29.72%
按下载量换算187

Cursor

18.97%
按下载量换算120

Gemini CLI

10.17%
按下载量换算64

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

可疑

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。来源安全扫描存在提醒或未通过项,安装前请自行复核。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills