[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"skill:01M6BTTPS8WFH4STEYWV46S2RG":3,"skill-same:01M6BTTPS8WFH4STEYWV46S2RG":77},{"skillNo":4,"name":5,"nameZh":6,"description":7,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":16,"categories":17,"keywords":28,"publishedAt":37,"linkOnly":38,"markdownContent":39,"markdownBody":40,"frontMatter":41,"refName":42,"commitSha":43,"skillDirectory":44,"forksCount":45,"repositoryHtmlUrl":46,"repositoryHomepageUrl":6,"ownerHtmlUrl":47,"ownerBlogUrl":48,"ownerDescription":49,"updatedAt":50,"install":51,"resources":64},"01M6BTTPS8WFH4STEYWV46S2RG","code-review",null,"Review the changes since a fixed point (commit, branch, tag, or merge-base) along two axes: Standards (does the code follow this repo's documented coding standards?) and Spec (does the code match what the originating issue\u002Fspec asked for?). Runs both reviews in parallel sub-agents and reports them side by side. Use when the user wants to review a branch, a PR, work-in-progress changes, or asks to \"review since X\".","merikan\u002F.dotfiles","merikan","https:\u002F\u002Favatars.githubusercontent.com\u002Fu\u002F60756?v=4","01M6BTTGAQHH68RYGENCRZ4X65","Peter Merikan","01M6BTTGFDDD744BTP3V4T2WMR",24,"MIT","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmerikan\u002F.dotfiles\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fconfig\u002Fagents\u002Fskills\u002Fcode-review\u002FSKILL.md",[18,23],{"categoryNo":19,"categoryName":20,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000007","代码审查","SCENARIO","使用场景",{"categoryNo":24,"categoryName":25,"taxonomyType":26,"taxonomyTypeDesc":27},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000030","开发工程师","PROFESSION","适用职业",[29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36],"code review","review","code","spec","commit","merge","pr","coding standards","2026-11-10 10:12:30",false,"---\nname: code-review\ndescription: \"Review the changes since a fixed point (commit, branch, tag, or merge-base) along two axes: Standards (does the code follow this repo's documented coding standards?) and Spec (does the code match what the originating issue\u002Fspec asked for?). Runs both reviews in parallel sub-agents and reports them side by side. Use when the user wants to review a branch, a PR, work-in-progress changes, or asks to \\\"review since X\\\".\"\n---\n\nTwo-axis review of the diff between `HEAD` and a fixed point the user supplies:\n\n- **Standards**: does the code conform to this repo's documented coding standards?\n- **Spec**: does the code faithfully implement the originating issue \u002F spec?\n\nBoth axes run as **parallel sub-agents** so they don't pollute each other's context, then this skill aggregates their findings.\n\nThe issue tracker should have been provided to you. If `docs\u002Fagents\u002Fissue-tracker.md` is missing, tell the user to run `\u002Fsetup-matt-pocock-skills`.\n\n## Process\n\n### 1. Pin the fixed point\n\nWhatever the user said is the fixed point (a commit SHA, branch name, tag, `main`, `HEAD~5`, etc.). If they didn't specify one, ask for it.\n\nCapture the diff command once: `git diff \u003Cfixed-point>...HEAD` (three-dot, so the comparison is against the merge-base). Also note the list of commits via `git log \u003Cfixed-point>..HEAD --oneline`.\n\nBefore going further, confirm the fixed point resolves (`git rev-parse \u003Cfixed-point>`) and the diff is non-empty. A bad ref or empty diff should fail here, not inside two parallel sub-agents.\n\n### 2. Identify the spec source\n\nLook for the originating spec, in this order:\n\n1. Issue references in the commit messages (`#123`, `Closes #45`, GitLab `!67`, etc.), fetched via the workflow in `docs\u002Fagents\u002Fissue-tracker.md`.\n2. A path the user passed as an argument.\n3. A spec file under `docs\u002F`, `specs\u002F`, or `.scratch\u002F` matching the branch name or feature.\n4. If nothing is found, ask the user where the spec is. If they say there isn't one, the **Spec** sub-agent will skip and report \"no spec available\".\n\n### 3. Identify the standards sources\n\nAnything in the repo that documents how code should be written, such as `CODING_STANDARDS.md` or `CONTRIBUTING.md`.\n\nOn top of whatever the repo documents, the Standards axis always carries the **smell baseline** below: a fixed set of Fowler code smells (_Refactoring_, ch.3) that applies even when a repo documents nothing. Two rules bind it:\n\n- **The repo overrides.** A documented repo standard always wins; where it endorses something the baseline would flag, suppress the smell.\n- **Always a judgement call.** Each smell is a labelled heuristic (\"possible Feature Envy\"), never a hard violation. Like any standard here, skip anything tooling already enforces.\n\nEach smell reads *what it is* → *how to fix*; match it against the diff:\n\n- **Mysterious Name**: a function, variable, or type whose name doesn't reveal what it does or holds. → rename it; if no honest name comes, the design's murky.\n- **Duplicated Code**: the same logic shape appears in more than one hunk or file in the change. → extract the shared shape, call it from both.\n- **Feature Envy**: a method that reaches into another object's data more than its own. → move the method onto the data it envies.\n- **Data Clumps**: the same few fields or params keep travelling together (a type wanting to be born). → bundle them into one type, pass that.\n- **Primitive Obsession**: a primitive or string standing in for a domain concept that deserves its own type. → give the concept its own small type.\n- **Repeated Switches**: the same `switch`\u002F`if`-cascade on the same type recurs across the change. → replace with polymorphism, or one map both sites share.\n- **Shotgun Surgery**: one logical change forces scattered edits across many files in the diff. → gather what changes together into one module.\n- **Divergent Change**: one file or module is edited for several unrelated reasons. → split so each module changes for one reason.\n- **Speculative Generality**: abstraction, parameters, or hooks added for needs the spec doesn't have. → delete it; inline back until a real need shows.\n- **Message Chains**: long `a.b().c().d()` navigation the caller shouldn't depend on. → hide the walk behind one method on the first object.\n- **Middle Man**: a class or function that mostly just delegates onward. → cut it, call the real target direct.\n- **Refused Bequest**: a subclass or implementer that ignores or overrides most of what it inherits. → drop the inheritance, use composition.\n\n### 4. Spawn both sub-agents in parallel\n\n**Standards sub-agent prompt** should include:\n\n- The full diff command and commit list.\n- The list of standards-source files you found in step 3, **plus the smell baseline from step 3** pasted in full (the sub-agent has no other access to it).\n- The brief: \"Report, per file\u002Fhunk where relevant, (a) every place the diff violates a documented standard: cite the standard (file + the rule); and (b) any baseline smell you spot: name it and quote the hunk. Distinguish hard violations from judgement calls: documented-standard breaches can be hard, but baseline smells are always judgement calls, and a documented repo standard overrides the baseline. Skip anything tooling enforces. Under 400 words.\"\n\n**Spec sub-agent prompt** should include:\n\n- The diff command and commit list.\n- The path or fetched contents of the spec.\n- The brief: \"Report: (a) requirements the spec asked for that are missing or partial; (b) behaviour in the diff that wasn't asked for (scope creep); (c) requirements that look implemented but where the implementation looks wrong. Quote the spec line for each finding. Under 400 words.\"\n\nIf the spec is missing, skip the Spec sub-agent and note this in the final report.\n\n### 5. Aggregate\n\nPresent the two reports under `## Standards` and `## Spec` headings, verbatim or lightly cleaned. Do **not** merge or rerank findings, because the two axes are deliberately separate (see _Why two axes_).\n\nEnd with a one-line summary: total findings per axis, and the worst issue _within each axis_ (if any). Don't pick a single winner across axes: that's the reranking the separation exists to prevent.\n\n## Why two axes\n\nA change can pass one axis and fail the other:\n\n- Code that follows every standard but implements the wrong thing → **Standards pass, Spec fail.**\n- Code that does exactly what the issue asked but breaks the project's conventions → **Spec pass, Standards fail.**\n\nReporting them separately stops one axis from masking the other.\n","Two-axis review of the diff between `HEAD` and a fixed point the user supplies:\n\n- **Standards**: does the code conform to this repo's documented coding standards?\n- **Spec**: does the code faithfully implement the originating issue \u002F spec?\n\nBoth axes run as **parallel sub-agents** so they don't pollute each other's context, then this skill aggregates their findings.\n\nThe issue tracker should have been provided to you. If `docs\u002Fagents\u002Fissue-tracker.md` is missing, tell the user to run `\u002Fsetup-matt-pocock-skills`.\n\n## Process\n\n### 1. Pin the fixed point\n\nWhatever the user said is the fixed point (a commit SHA, branch name, tag, `main`, `HEAD~5`, etc.). If they didn't specify one, ask for it.\n\nCapture the diff command once: `git diff \u003Cfixed-point>...HEAD` (three-dot, so the comparison is against the merge-base). Also note the list of commits via `git log \u003Cfixed-point>..HEAD --oneline`.\n\nBefore going further, confirm the fixed point resolves (`git rev-parse \u003Cfixed-point>`) and the diff is non-empty. A bad ref or empty diff should fail here, not inside two parallel sub-agents.\n\n### 2. Identify the spec source\n\nLook for the originating spec, in this order:\n\n1. Issue references in the commit messages (`#123`, `Closes #45`, GitLab `!67`, etc.), fetched via the workflow in `docs\u002Fagents\u002Fissue-tracker.md`.\n2. A path the user passed as an argument.\n3. A spec file under `docs\u002F`, `specs\u002F`, or `.scratch\u002F` matching the branch name or feature.\n4. If nothing is found, ask the user where the spec is. If they say there isn't one, the **Spec** sub-agent will skip and report \"no spec available\".\n\n### 3. Identify the standards sources\n\nAnything in the repo that documents how code should be written, such as `CODING_STANDARDS.md` or `CONTRIBUTING.md`.\n\nOn top of whatever the repo documents, the Standards axis always carries the **smell baseline** below: a fixed set of Fowler code smells (_Refactoring_, ch.3) that applies even when a repo documents nothing. Two rules bind it:\n\n- **The repo overrides.** A documented repo standard always wins; where it endorses something the baseline would flag, suppress the smell.\n- **Always a judgement call.** Each smell is a labelled heuristic (\"possible Feature Envy\"), never a hard violation. Like any standard here, skip anything tooling already enforces.\n\nEach smell reads *what it is* → *how to fix*; match it against the diff:\n\n- **Mysterious Name**: a function, variable, or type whose name doesn't reveal what it does or holds. → rename it; if no honest name comes, the design's murky.\n- **Duplicated Code**: the same logic shape appears in more than one hunk or file in the change. → extract the shared shape, call it from both.\n- **Feature Envy**: a method that reaches into another object's data more than its own. → move the method onto the data it envies.\n- **Data Clumps**: the same few fields or params keep travelling together (a type wanting to be born). → bundle them into one type, pass that.\n- **Primitive Obsession**: a primitive or string standing in for a domain concept that deserves its own type. → give the concept its own small type.\n- **Repeated Switches**: the same `switch`\u002F`if`-cascade on the same type recurs across the change. → replace with polymorphism, or one map both sites share.\n- **Shotgun Surgery**: one logical change forces scattered edits across many files in the diff. → gather what changes together into one module.\n- **Divergent Change**: one file or module is edited for several unrelated reasons. → split so each module changes for one reason.\n- **Speculative Generality**: abstraction, parameters, or hooks added for needs the spec doesn't have. → delete it; inline back until a real need shows.\n- **Message Chains**: long `a.b().c().d()` navigation the caller shouldn't depend on. → hide the walk behind one method on the first object.\n- **Middle Man**: a class or function that mostly just delegates onward. → cut it, call the real target direct.\n- **Refused Bequest**: a subclass or implementer that ignores or overrides most of what it inherits. → drop the inheritance, use composition.\n\n### 4. Spawn both sub-agents in parallel\n\n**Standards sub-agent prompt** should include:\n\n- The full diff command and commit list.\n- The list of standards-source files you found in step 3, **plus the smell baseline from step 3** pasted in full (the sub-agent has no other access to it).\n- The brief: \"Report, per file\u002Fhunk where relevant, (a) every place the diff violates a documented standard: cite the standard (file + the rule); and (b) any baseline smell you spot: name it and quote the hunk. Distinguish hard violations from judgement calls: documented-standard breaches can be hard, but baseline smells are always judgement calls, and a documented repo standard overrides the baseline. Skip anything tooling enforces. Under 400 words.\"\n\n**Spec sub-agent prompt** should include:\n\n- The diff command and commit list.\n- The path or fetched contents of the spec.\n- The brief: \"Report: (a) requirements the spec asked for that are missing or partial; (b) behaviour in the diff that wasn't asked for (scope creep); (c) requirements that look implemented but where the implementation looks wrong. Quote the spec line for each finding. Under 400 words.\"\n\nIf the spec is missing, skip the Spec sub-agent and note this in the final report.\n\n### 5. Aggregate\n\nPresent the two reports under `## Standards` and `## Spec` headings, verbatim or lightly cleaned. Do **not** merge or rerank findings, because the two axes are deliberately separate (see _Why two axes_).\n\nEnd with a one-line summary: total findings per axis, and the worst issue _within each axis_ (if any). Don't pick a single winner across axes: that's the reranking the separation exists to prevent.\n\n## Why two axes\n\nA change can pass one axis and fail the other:\n\n- Code that follows every standard but implements the wrong thing → **Standards pass, Spec fail.**\n- Code that does exactly what the issue asked but breaks the project's conventions → **Spec pass, Standards fail.**\n\nReporting them separately stops one axis from masking the other.\n",{"name":5,"description":7},"main","8a4d0d0c9cff41dc142e34ad04b7a5bbc5237e27","config\u002Fagents\u002Fskills\u002Fcode-review",5,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmerikan\u002F.dotfiles","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmerikan","https:\u002F\u002Fmerikan.com","In software development, complexity might be admired but simplicity is always rewarded.\r\n@merikan:matrix.org","2026-11-04 17:07:27",{"source":8,"skillName":5,"commands":52,"prompt":62,"zipAvailable":63},[53,56,59],{"tool":54,"command":55},"npx","npx skills add merikan\u002F.dotfiles --skill code-review",{"tool":57,"command":58},"bunx","bunx skills add merikan\u002F.dotfiles --skill code-review",{"tool":60,"command":61},"pnpm","pnpm dlx skills add merikan\u002F.dotfiles --skill code-review","安装技能，技能地址：https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmerikan\u002F.dotfiles\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fconfig\u002Fagents\u002Fskills\u002Fcode-review\u002FSKILL.md",true,[65,71],{"path":66,"resourceType":67,"resourceTypeDesc":68,"sizeBytes":69,"sourceHtmlUrl":70},"agents\u002Fopenai.yaml","REFERENCE","参考文档",100,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmerikan\u002F.dotfiles\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fconfig\u002Fagents\u002Fskills\u002Fcode-review\u002Fagents\u002Fopenai.yaml",{"path":72,"resourceType":73,"resourceTypeDesc":74,"sizeBytes":75,"sourceHtmlUrl":76},"scripts\u002Fwaste-analysis.sh","SCRIPT","脚本",2647,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Flaurigates\u002Fclaude-plugins\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Ffinops-plugin\u002Fskills\u002Ffinops-waste\u002Fscripts\u002Fwaste-analysis.sh",[78,107,117,127,138,148],{"skillNo":79,"name":80,"nameZh":6,"description":81,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":82,"categories":83,"keywords":90,"publishedAt":37},"01M6M2D557KJ8JGQFPVV7VWBVZ","writing-review","Review a blog post or article draft and write numbered findings to a review file, then track the author's fixes across rounds. Use when the user asks to review, give feedback on, or suggest improvements to a blog post or article.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmerikan\u002F.dotfiles\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fconfig\u002Fagents\u002Fskills\u002Fwriting-review\u002FSKILL.md",[84,87],{"categoryNo":85,"categoryName":86,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000018","写作与文案",{"categoryNo":88,"categoryName":89,"taxonomyType":26,"taxonomyTypeDesc":27},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000036","内容创作者",[91,30,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100,101,102,103,104,105,106],"writing review","writing","give feedback","track","use","draft","across","article","post","fixes","user","write","blog post","feedback","blog","file",{"skillNo":108,"name":109,"nameZh":6,"description":110,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":111,"categories":112,"keywords":115,"publishedAt":37},"01M6BTWQZM2ZSGTQ9N2ZSNTZBC","writing-shape","Writing, exploit: shape raw material into an article, paragraph by paragraph.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmerikan\u002F.dotfiles\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fconfig\u002Fagents\u002Fskills\u002Fwriting-shape\u002FSKILL.md",[113,114],{"categoryNo":85,"categoryName":86,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},{"categoryNo":88,"categoryName":89,"taxonomyType":26,"taxonomyTypeDesc":27},[116,92],"writing shape",{"skillNo":118,"name":119,"nameZh":6,"description":120,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":121,"categories":122,"keywords":125,"publishedAt":37},"01M6BTWP834Z8KXFYVWCPFDA81","writing-fragments","Writing, explore: mine raw fragments, no structure yet.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmerikan\u002F.dotfiles\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fconfig\u002Fagents\u002Fskills\u002Fwriting-fragments\u002FSKILL.md",[123,124],{"categoryNo":85,"categoryName":86,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},{"categoryNo":88,"categoryName":89,"taxonomyType":26,"taxonomyTypeDesc":27},[126,92],"writing fragments",{"skillNo":128,"name":129,"nameZh":6,"description":130,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":131,"categories":132,"keywords":135,"publishedAt":37},"01M6BTWMQEDS6TBBDEWR59HYA9","writing-for-agents","Writing documents for agents. Use when creating or editing skills, or modifying AGENTS.md or CLAUDE.md.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmerikan\u002F.dotfiles\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fconfig\u002Fagents\u002Fskills\u002Fwriting-for-agents\u002FSKILL.md",[133,134],{"categoryNo":85,"categoryName":86,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},{"categoryNo":88,"categoryName":89,"taxonomyType":26,"taxonomyTypeDesc":27},[136,92,137],"writing for agents","documents",{"skillNo":139,"name":140,"nameZh":6,"description":141,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":142,"categories":143,"keywords":146,"publishedAt":37},"01M6BTWK4HTM6KQMW9WPR290JN","writing-beats","Writing, exploit; assemble raw material into a journey of beats, grounding each term before a beat leans on it.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmerikan\u002F.dotfiles\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fconfig\u002Fagents\u002Fskills\u002Fwriting-beats\u002FSKILL.md",[144,145],{"categoryNo":85,"categoryName":86,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},{"categoryNo":88,"categoryName":89,"taxonomyType":26,"taxonomyTypeDesc":27},[147,92],"writing beats",{"skillNo":149,"name":150,"nameZh":6,"description":151,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":152,"categories":153,"keywords":154,"publishedAt":37},"01M6BTWGX31186Q23VXHJHAA48","wizard","Generate an interactive bash wizard that walks a human through steps only they can perform. Use when provisioning infrastructure, setting up credentials or CI secrets, walking an unfamiliar third-party dashboard, or running a one-off migration or cutover. Don't invoke this for steps the agent can perform itself.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmerikan\u002F.dotfiles\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fconfig\u002Fagents\u002Fskills\u002Fwizard\u002FSKILL.md",[],[150,155,156,157,158,159,160,161,162],"dashboard","Bash","secrets","credentials","provisioning","ci","generate","infrastructure"]