Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

review(审查)

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。

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,权限为只读;许可证为 MIT,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 70,604。

总安装 210周安装 9GitHub Stars 2下载 73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
MIT

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:review(审查)
来源仓库:https://github.com/doodledood/codex-workflow
仓库路径:skills/review
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/doodledood/codex-workflow --skill 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。不同来源提供的安装方式可能略有差异;本站展示可直接复制的安装命令,安装前请核对来源页面。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/doodledood/codex-workflow --skill 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。

review 整合多维度代码审查,涵盖 bug、类型、可维护性等检查项。适用于 PR 合并前自动化验证,支持跳过或限定审查类型。输出 consolidated 报告,标注问题位置与修复建议。需指定文件或 diff 范围,否则默认全量扫描可能耗时较长。

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/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/doodledood/codex-workflow --skill 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

    它标注为只读,先用只读任务试一次,确认行为符合预期再扩大使用范围。

常见问题

6 条

review 怎么安装?

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

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。

review 需要什么权限?

权限级别是只读。该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

review 是免费的吗?

来源标注的许可证是 MIT。本站不代收任何费用,也不托管安装包;能否商用、要不要署名,以许可证原文为准。

review 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 210 次,近一周安装 9 次,下载 73 次,GitHub 2 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。

review 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。
  • 3 个目录同时收录,说明这个 Skill 流传比较广。
  • 许可证明确为 MIT,商用和分发边界好判断。
  • 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

  • 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。
  • 需要许可证清楚、并且有第三方扫描结果的团队项目。

不太适合

  • 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
review

审查 · 本页

2102只读MIT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

User request: $ARGUMENTS

Orchestrate comprehensive code review by running specialized review skills and consolidating findings.

Flags:

  • --autonomous → no user prompts, run all applicable reviews, return consolidated report
  • --skip <types> → skip specific review types (comma-separated: bugs, types, maintainability, simplicity, testability, coverage, docs, agents-md)
  • --only <types> → run only specific review types

Output: Consolidated review report to user.

Phase 1: Setup

1.1 Determine Scope

Priority order for scope:

  1. User specifies files/directories in $ARGUMENTS → use those
  2. Otherwise → diff against origin/main or origin/master
  3. No changes found → ask user what to review

1.2 Select Reviews

Determine which reviews to run based on scope and arguments:

Review TypeSkillWhen to Include
Bugs$review-bugsAlways (unless skipped)
Type Safety$review-type-safetyTypeScript/typed Python detected
Maintainability$review-maintainabilityAlways (unless skipped)
Simplicity$review-simplicityAlways (unless skipped)
Testability$review-testabilityAlways (unless skipped)
Coverage$review-coverageTest files exist in project
Docs$review-docsAlways (unless skipped)
AGENTS.md$review-agents-md-adherenceAGENTS.md file exists

Detection logic:

  • TypeScript: tsconfig.json exists
  • Typed Python: pyproject.toml with mypy config OR py.typed marker
  • Test files: *.test.*, *.spec.*, __tests__/, tests/ exist
  • AGENTS.md: file exists in project root or parent directories

1.3 Create Todo List

- [ ] Run bug review
- [ ] Run type safety review (if applicable)
- [ ] Run maintainability review
- [ ] Run simplicity review
- [ ] Run testability review
- [ ] Run coverage review (if applicable)
- [ ] Run docs review
- [ ] Run AGENTS.md review (if applicable)
- [ ] Consolidate findings

Phase 2: Execute Reviews

2.1 Review Loop

For each selected review type:

  1. Mark todo in_progress
  2. Execute the review skill
  3. Capture findings (severity, location, description, suggested fix)
  4. Mark todo completed
  5. Continue to next review

2.2 Individual Review Execution

Run each review against the same scope:

Bug Review:

$review-bugs {scope}

Type Safety Review (if TypeScript/typed Python):

$review-type-safety {scope}

Maintainability Review:

$review-maintainability {scope}

Simplicity Review:

$review-simplicity {scope}

Testability Review:

$review-testability {scope}

Coverage Review (if tests exist):

$review-coverage {scope}

Docs Review:

$review-docs {scope}

AGENTS.md Review (if AGENTS.md exists):

$review-agents-md-adherence {scope}

2.3 Capture Findings

From each review, extract issues with:

  • Category: bugs | type-safety | maintainability | simplicity | testability | coverage | docs | agents-md
  • Severity: Critical | High | Medium | Low
  • Location: file:line
  • Description: What the issue is
  • Suggested Fix: How to resolve

Phase 3: Consolidate

3.1 Merge and Deduplicate

Combine all findings:

  1. Group by severity (Critical → High → Medium → Low)
  2. Within severity, group by category
  3. Deduplicate: same file:line with similar description → merge, keep highest severity

3.2 Generate Report

# Code Review Report

**Scope**: {files/changes reviewed}
**Reviews run**: {list of review types executed}

## Summary

| Category | Critical | High | Medium | Low |
|----------|----------|------|--------|-----|
| Bugs | N | N | N | N |
| Type Safety | N | N | N | N |
| Maintainability | N | N | N | N |
| Simplicity | N | N | N | N |
| Testability | N | N | N | N |
| Coverage | N | N | N | N |
| Docs | N | N | N | N |
| AGENTS.md | N | N | N | N |
| **Total** | N | N | N | N |

## Critical Issues

### [BUG] {Title}
**Location**: `file.ts:line`
**Description**: {issue}
**Suggested Fix**: {fix}

### [TYPE] {Title}
...

## High Issues
{Same format}

## Medium Issues
{Same format}

## Low Issues
{Same format}

## Review Status

| Review | Status | Issues Found |
|--------|--------|--------------|
| Bugs | ✓ Complete | N |
| Type Safety | ✓ Complete | N |
| Maintainability | ✓ Complete | N |
| Simplicity | ✓ Complete | N |
| Testability | ✓ Complete | N |
| Coverage | ✓ Complete | N |
| Docs | ✓ Complete | N |
| AGENTS.md | ✓ Complete | N |

## Recommendations

### Priority Fixes (do first)
1. {Critical/High issue with highest impact}
2. {Second priority}
3. {Third priority}

### Quick Wins (easy fixes)
- {Low-effort issues that can be fixed quickly}

### Deferred (consider later)
- {Low-severity issues that don't block merge}

3.3 Clean Report

If no issues found:

# Code Review Report

**Scope**: {files/changes reviewed}
**Reviews run**: {list}
**Status**: ALL CLEAR

No issues found. Code is ready for merge.

## Review Status

| Review | Status | Issues Found |
|--------|--------|--------------|
| Bugs | ✓ Complete | 0 |
| Type Safety | ✓ Complete | 0 |
...

Phase 4: Present Results

4.1 If --autonomous

Return consolidated report without prompts.

4.2 If Interactive

Present summary and ask:

## Review Complete

Found {N} issues across {M} categories.

Critical: {N} | High: {N} | Medium: {N} | Low: {N}

### Top Priority Fixes
1. {Issue 1}
2. {Issue 2}
3. {Issue 3}

What would you like to do?
Options:
  - Fix issues - run $fix-review-issues (Recommended if Critical/High exist)
  - Show full report - see all findings
  - Done - I'll address manually

Edge Cases

CaseAction
No scope (no changes, no files specified)Ask user what to review
No applicable reviews (e.g., no TS, no tests, no AGENTS.md)Run only applicable reviews, note skipped
Review skill errorsNote error in report, continue with other reviews
All reviews cleanReport "ALL CLEAR"
Very large scopeWarn user, proceed (reviews handle internally)

Guidelines

  • Comprehensive: Run all applicable reviews unless explicitly skipped
  • Consolidated: Single unified report, not multiple separate outputs
  • Actionable: Prioritize findings, suggest fix order
  • Efficient: Skip inapplicable reviews (no TypeScript = skip type review)
  • Autonomous: Support --autonomous for CI/automation use

平台分布

Claude Code

29.19%
按下载量换算21

OpenCode

19.43%
按下载量换算14

Antigravity

18.06%
按下载量换算13

Gemini CLI

11.87%
按下载量换算9

windsurf

8.03%
按下载量换算6

Codex

3.51%
按下载量换算3

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

只读

该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

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。

继续浏览同类 Skills