Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

review-pr(审查公关)

review-pr 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-pr 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,权限为调用外部服务;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 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 39,607。

总安装 1,388周安装 59GitHub Stars 2下载 486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:review-pr(审查公关)
来源仓库:https://github.com/oschina/gitee-agent-skills
仓库路径:skills/review-pr
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/oschina/gitee-agent-skills --skill review-pr
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/oschina/gitee-agent-skills --skill review-pr

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-pr 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在需要根据关键词快速定位候选结果的场景中使用。适用于研究检索类任务,可结合来源仓库和原始 README 核验具体用法。通过 npx skills add 命令从 oschina/gitee-agent-skills 仓库安装。

安装前建议确认权限范围和维护状态,避免触发联网或文件读写操作。使用时需注意工具输出不能直接作为最终结论,应结合实际场景验证结果。

来源仓库内路径:skills/review-pr

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/oschina/gitee-agent-skills --skill review-pr;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

    它需要调用外部服务,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

review-pr 怎么安装?

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

review-pr 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-pr 需要什么权限?

权限级别是调用外部服务。该 Skill 可能调用第三方服务、云服务或外部模型 API,使用前需要确认账号、额度、数据发送范围和服务条款。

review-pr 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。

review-pr 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 1,388 次,近一周安装 59 次,下载 486 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-pr 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
review-pr

审查公关 · 本页

1,3882调用外部服务未明确有提醒

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

Note: If you have mcporter installed locally, you should use mcporter to invoke the MCP tool instead of directly calling the MCP tool. The mcporter CLI provides a more convenient interface and better error handling.

Review PR via Gitee MCP

Perform a thorough code review on a Pull Request in a Gitee repository.

Prerequisites

  • Gitee MCP Server configured (tools: get_pull_detail, get_diff_files, list_comments (resource_type: pull), create_comment (resource_type: pull))
  • User must provide: repository owner, repository name, PR number (or say "review the latest PR")
  • Optional: If the current directory is the local clone of the PR's repository, you can leverage local git commands and file access to get more context.

Steps

Step 1: Fetch PR Details

Use get_pull_detail to retrieve PR information, checking:

  • Whether the title and description clearly explain the purpose of the changes
  • Whether the source and target branches are correct
  • PR state (if already closed/merged, stop the review)
  • Whether it is a Draft — if so, notify the user

Step 2: Fetch Diff Files

Use get_diff_files to get the list of changed files, analyzing:

  • Number and scope of changed files
  • Whether any sensitive files are involved (config files, secrets, permission-related code)

For each core changed file, use get_file_content to read its content for context.

If running in the local repository directory, leverage local git commands and file access to gain additional context for the review (e.g., viewing related commits, related files, file history).

Step 3: Check Existing Comments

Use list_comments (resource_type: pull) to retrieve existing comments and avoid raising issues that have already been discussed.

Step 4: Code Review

Review the code across these dimensions:

Correctness

  • Is the logic correct? Are edge cases handled?
  • Are there obvious bugs or null pointer risks?
  • Is error handling adequate?

Security

  • Are there SQL injection, XSS, command injection, or other security risks?
  • Is sensitive information hardcoded?
  • Are permission checks in place?

Maintainability

  • Are names clear and semantic?
  • Does each function/method have a single responsibility?
  • Are complex logic blocks documented with comments?

Performance

  • Are there unnecessary nested loops or N+1 queries?
  • Are large file operations mindful of memory usage?

Consistency

  • Does the code follow the existing project style?
  • Is it consistent with related modules?

Step 5: Classify Issues

Classify findings by severity:

  • 🔴 Blocker: Affects correctness or has a security risk — must be fixed
  • 🟡 Suggestion: Code quality issue — recommended but not mandatory
  • 🟢 Optional: Nice-to-have improvement

Step 6: Present Review to User

STOP — Do not post yet!

Present the review content to the user for confirmation. Use this format:

## Code Review Preview

**Summary**: [One sentence describing the purpose of the PR and overall quality assessment]

### 🔴 Blockers
1. **[filename:line]** [Issue description]
   - Problem: [Specific explanation]
   - Suggestion: [How to fix it]

### 🟡 Suggestions
1. **[filename]** [Issue description]
   - Suggestion: [Direction for improvement]

### 🟢 Optional
1. [Improvement suggestion]

### Conclusion
[Overall assessment — LGTM or key changes needed]

If no issues are found, show:

## Code Review Preview

LGTM! No significant issues found. Code quality looks good.

Then ask the user: "请确认以上评审内容是否有问题。确认无误后,我将提交到 PR。"

Step 7: Post Review Comment (After User Confirmation)

Once the user confirms the review content is correct, use create_comment (resource_type: pull) to post the review to the PR. Use this format:

## Code Review

**Summary**: [One sentence describing the purpose of the PR and overall quality assessment]

### 🔴 Blockers
1. **[filename:line]** [Issue description]
   - Problem: [Specific explanation]
   - Suggestion: [How to fix it]

### 🟡 Suggestions
1. **[filename]** [Issue description]
   - Suggestion: [Direction for improvement]

### 🟢 Optional
1. [Improvement suggestion]

### Conclusion
[Overall assessment — LGTM or key changes needed]

🤖 Generated by AI + Gitee MCP

If no issues are found, comment:

## Code Review

LGTM! No significant issues found. Code quality looks good.

🤖 Generated by AI + Gitee MCP

Notes

  • Focus only on new/modified code in the PR, not pre-existing code
  • Avoid nitpicking — do not raise issues that a linter would automatically catch
  • Comments should be specific and actionable — provide suggestions, not just observations
  • For uncertain issues, say "recommend verifying" rather than asserting it is definitely a bug

平台分布

Codex

35.06%
按下载量换算170

Claude

30.11%
按下载量换算146

Cursor

17.84%
按下载量换算87

Gemini CLI

9.15%
按下载量换算44

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

可疑

Snyk

可疑

权限和风险

调用外部服务

该 Skill 可能调用第三方服务、云服务或外部模型 API,使用前需要确认账号、额度、数据发送范围和服务条款。

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