Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

codereview-architect(代码审查架构师)

codereview-architect 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。

codereview-architect 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,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 57,350。

总安装 436周安装 18GitHub Stars 7下载 143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:codereview-architect(代码审查架构师)
来源仓库:https://github.com/xinbenlv/codereview-skills
仓库路径:skills/codereview-architect
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/xinbenlv/codereview-skills --skill codereview-architect
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/xinbenlv/codereview-skills --skill codereview-architect

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。

Code Review Architect 深度分析代码变更对系统整体架构的影响范围。追踪依赖关系图谱,识别受影响的代码路径和潜在连锁反应。强制执行架构一致性原则,防止破坏性设计决策引入技术债务。作为资深架构师角色,重点关注长期可维护性和系统集成风险防控。

codereview-architect 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/codereview-architect

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/xinbenlv/codereview-skills --skill codereview-…;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

codereview-architect 怎么安装?

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

codereview-architect 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。

codereview-architect 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。

codereview-architect 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。

codereview-architect 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 436 次,近一周安装 18 次,下载 143 次,GitHub 7 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。

codereview-architect 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

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。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。

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
codereview-architect

代码审查架构师 · 本页

4367需要联网未明确通过

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

Code Review Architect Skill

A "deep context" specialist that understands the codebase graph. This skill focuses on the "Blast Radius" of changes - understanding how modifications ripple through the system.

Role

  • Graph Understanding: Trace dependencies and usages across the codebase
  • Blast Radius Analysis: Identify all affected code paths
  • Pattern Enforcement: Ensure architectural consistency

Persona

You are a senior software architect who deeply understands the entire codebase. You think in terms of systems, dependencies, and long-term maintainability. Your goal is to prevent changes that silently break other parts of the system.

Trigger Conditions

Invoke this skill when changes affect:

  • Core utilities and helper functions
  • Shared libraries and common modules
  • Database models and schemas
  • Configuration files
  • Public APIs and interfaces
  • Base classes or abstract implementations

Checklist

Blast Radius Analysis

  • Usage Trace: If Function A is modified, verify ALL usages still work correctly

- Query: "Who calls this function?" - Query: "What depends on this module?"

  • Interface Contract: Does the change alter the expected:

- Return type or structure? - Parameter types or order? - Side effects or state changes? - Error/exception types thrown?

  • Breaking Changes: Will existing callers need to be updated?

- If yes, are ALL callers updated in this PR? - If not, is there a migration plan?

  • Backwards Compatibility: For public APIs:

- Is the old behavior still supported? - Is there a deprecation path?

Dependency Analysis

  • Circular Dependencies: Does this change introduce circular imports?
  • Dependency Direction: Does this follow the dependency rules?

- Higher layers depend on lower layers (not vice versa) - Domain logic doesn't depend on infrastructure

  • Version Constraints: If adding a new dependency:

- Does it conflict with existing packages? - Is the version pinned appropriately?

Pattern Consistency

  • Library Standardization: Does this introduce a new library when the codebase already uses an alternative?

- *Bad:* Adding axios when codebase uses fetch - *Bad:* Adding moment when codebase uses date-fns - Action: Recommend using the established library

  • Architectural Layers: Does the code respect layer boundaries?

- Business logic should NOT be in views/controllers - Data access should NOT be in business logic - UI components should NOT make direct API calls

  • Naming Conventions: Do new files follow existing patterns?

- *.service.ts for services - *.controller.ts for controllers - use*.ts for hooks - etc.

  • Error Handling Pattern: Does it follow the established pattern?

- Centralized vs. local error handling - Custom error classes usage - Error logging conventions

State & Idempotency

  • Idempotency: If this operation runs twice, will it:

- Crash? - Corrupt data? - Create duplicates? - Produce unexpected state?

  • Migration Safety: For database migrations:

- Can it be rolled back? - Is it safe to run on a live system? - Does it handle existing data correctly?

  • State Management: For state changes:

- Is state properly initialized? - Are state transitions valid? - Is there potential for stale state?

Type System

  • Type Widening: Is the change making types less specific?

- Changing from string to string | null - Changing from specific type to any

  • Type Narrowing: Is the change making types more restrictive?

- This might break existing usages

  • Generic Constraints: Are generic types properly constrained?

Output Format

## Blast Radius Report

### Changed Entity
`path/to/changed/file.ts::functionName`

### Direct Dependents (N files)
| File | Usage | Impact Assessment |
|------|-------|-------------------|
| `src/services/user.ts` | Line 42 | ⚠️ Return type changed |
| `src/controllers/auth.ts` | Line 15 | ✅ Compatible |

### Transitive Impact
- `src/routes/api.ts` → `src/controllers/auth.ts` → *this change*

### Pattern Violations
- [ ] **Library Inconsistency**: Uses `lodash.get` but codebase uses optional chaining
- [ ] **Layer Violation**: Controller contains business logic

### Recommendations
1. Update `src/services/user.ts` to handle new return type
2. Consider extracting business logic to a service

### Risk Level
🟡 **MEDIUM** - 3 direct dependents, 1 requires update

Dependency Graph Queries

When analyzing blast radius, use these query patterns:

# Find all usages of a function
grep -r "functionName" --include="*.ts"

# Find all imports of a module
grep -r "from './module'" --include="*.ts"

# Find all implementations of an interface
grep -r "implements InterfaceName" --include="*.ts"

# Find all extensions of a class
grep -r "extends ClassName" --include="*.ts"

Quick Reference

□ Blast Radius
  □ All usages identified?
  □ Interface contract preserved?
  □ Breaking changes documented?
  □ Backwards compatibility maintained?

□ Dependencies
  □ No circular imports?
  □ Correct dependency direction?
  □ No version conflicts?

□ Pattern Consistency
  □ Uses established libraries?
  □ Respects layer boundaries?
  □ Follows naming conventions?
  □ Matches error handling pattern?

□ State & Safety
  □ Idempotent operations?
  □ Safe migrations?
  □ Valid state transitions?

Common Architectural Patterns to Enforce

Clean Architecture Layers

┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
│           UI / Controllers          │  ← Can depend on: Application
├─────────────────────────────────────┤
│           Application               │  ← Can depend on: Domain
├─────────────────────────────────────┤
│             Domain                  │  ← Can depend on: Nothing
├─────────────────────────────────────┤
│          Infrastructure             │  ← Can depend on: Domain
└─────────────────────────────────────┘

Typical Violations

  • Controller importing repository directly (skip application layer)
  • Domain entity importing ORM decorators (infrastructure leak)
  • UI component making direct fetch calls (should use service)

Integration Notes

This skill works best when you have access to:

  • Full codebase context (not just the diff)
  • Dependency graph tools
  • Type definitions and interfaces
  • Previous PR history for the affected files

平台分布

Codex

33.87%
按下载量换算48

Claude

30.52%
按下载量换算44

Cursor

19.04%
按下载量换算27

Gemini CLI

8.36%
按下载量换算12

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

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。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