[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"skill:01M6P7092C3EF8Z3DVHCPD0G6D":3,"skill-same:01M6P7092C3EF8Z3DVHCPD0G6D":80},{"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":49,"linkOnly":50,"markdownContent":51,"markdownBody":52,"frontMatter":53,"refName":54,"commitSha":55,"skillDirectory":56,"forksCount":14,"repositoryHtmlUrl":57,"repositoryHomepageUrl":6,"ownerHtmlUrl":58,"ownerBlogUrl":6,"ownerDescription":6,"updatedAt":59,"install":60,"resources":73},"01M6P7092C3EF8Z3DVHCPD0G6D","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\u002FPRD 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\".","asushiroo\u002Fdotfiles","asushiroo","https:\u002F\u002Favatars.githubusercontent.com\u002Fu\u002F113016352?v=4","01M6P6Z9RW9SDSR9XHPMBAYVE6","asushiro","01M6P6Z9WSWDRXZNZCSB4W5JC2",0,"MIT","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fasushiroo\u002Fdotfiles\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002F.codex\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",[29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48],"review","code review","code","changes","for","reviews","progress","base","what the","reports","standards","use","repo","branch","work","parallel","pr","merge","commit","spec","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\u002FPRD 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 PRD \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 — run `\u002Fsetup-matt-pocock-skills` if `docs\u002Fagents\u002Fissue-tracker.md` is missing.\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.) — fetch via the workflow in `docs\u002Fagents\u002Fissue-tracker.md`.\n2. A path the user passed as an argument.\n3. A PRD\u002Fspec 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 — and, 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\nSend a single message with two `Agent` tool calls. Use the `general-purpose` subagent for both.\n\n**Standards sub-agent prompt** — 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** — 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 — 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 PRD \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 — run `\u002Fsetup-matt-pocock-skills` if `docs\u002Fagents\u002Fissue-tracker.md` is missing.\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.) — fetch via the workflow in `docs\u002Fagents\u002Fissue-tracker.md`.\n2. A path the user passed as an argument.\n3. A PRD\u002Fspec 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 — and, 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\nSend a single message with two `Agent` tool calls. Use the `general-purpose` subagent for both.\n\n**Standards sub-agent prompt** — 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** — 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 — 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","820a8ecb416e59312ffc2b60c29b66eaf5aa27a4",".codex\u002Fskills\u002Fcode-review","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fasushiroo\u002Fdotfiles","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fasushiroo","2026-10-02 15:40:43",{"source":8,"skillName":5,"commands":61,"prompt":71,"zipAvailable":72},[62,65,68],{"tool":63,"command":64},"npx","npx skills add asushiroo\u002Fdotfiles --skill code-review",{"tool":66,"command":67},"bunx","bunx skills add asushiroo\u002Fdotfiles --skill code-review",{"tool":69,"command":70},"pnpm","pnpm dlx skills add asushiroo\u002Fdotfiles --skill code-review","安装技能，技能地址：https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fasushiroo\u002Fdotfiles\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002F.codex\u002Fskills\u002Fcode-review\u002FSKILL.md",true,[74],{"path":75,"resourceType":76,"resourceTypeDesc":77,"sizeBytes":78,"sourceHtmlUrl":79},"agents\u002Fopenai.yaml","REFERENCE","参考文档",100,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fasushiroo\u002Fdotfiles\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002F.codex\u002Fskills\u002Fcode-review\u002Fagents\u002Fopenai.yaml",[81,101,116,129,143,167],{"skillNo":82,"name":83,"nameZh":6,"description":84,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":85,"categories":86,"keywords":93,"publishedAt":49},"01M6P7AB02738RGKB9RM8QHCA5","writing-shape","Writing, exploit — shape raw material into an article, paragraph by paragraph.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fasushiroo\u002Fdotfiles\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002F.codex\u002Fskills\u002Fwriting-shape\u002FSKILL.md",[87,90],{"categoryNo":88,"categoryName":89,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000018","写作与文案",{"categoryNo":91,"categoryName":92,"taxonomyType":26,"taxonomyTypeDesc":27},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000036","内容创作者",[94,95,96,97,98,99,100],"shape","writing shape","writing","exploit","article","material","true",{"skillNo":102,"name":103,"nameZh":6,"description":104,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":105,"categories":106,"keywords":109,"publishedAt":49},"01M6P7A81YB2M6P1V7C0BC5YP9","writing-great-skills","Reference for writing and editing skills well — the vocabulary and principles that make a skill predictable.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fasushiroo\u002Fdotfiles\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002F.codex\u002Fskills\u002Fwriting-great-skills\u002FSKILL.md",[107,108],{"categoryNo":88,"categoryName":89,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},{"categoryNo":91,"categoryName":92,"taxonomyType":26,"taxonomyTypeDesc":27},[96,110,111,112,113,114,115,100,33],"writing great skills","editing","reference","vocabulary","make","principles",{"skillNo":117,"name":118,"nameZh":6,"description":119,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":120,"categories":121,"keywords":124,"publishedAt":49},"01M6P7A57S23PPT7MY9E9E08AB","writing-fragments","Writing, explore — mine raw fragments, no structure yet.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fasushiroo\u002Fdotfiles\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002F.codex\u002Fskills\u002Fwriting-fragments\u002FSKILL.md",[122,123],{"categoryNo":88,"categoryName":89,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},{"categoryNo":91,"categoryName":92,"taxonomyType":26,"taxonomyTypeDesc":27},[125,96,126,127,128,100],"writing fragments","mine","explore","structure",{"skillNo":130,"name":131,"nameZh":6,"description":132,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":133,"categories":134,"keywords":137,"publishedAt":49},"01M6P7A2S5VH0PPWAJTBBH6987","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\u002Fasushiroo\u002Fdotfiles\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002F.codex\u002Fskills\u002Fwriting-beats\u002FSKILL.md",[135,136],{"categoryNo":88,"categoryName":89,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},{"categoryNo":91,"categoryName":92,"taxonomyType":26,"taxonomyTypeDesc":27},[96,138,97,100,139,140,99,141,142],"writing beats","grounding","it","journey","assemble",{"skillNo":144,"name":145,"nameZh":6,"description":146,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":147,"categories":148,"keywords":149,"publishedAt":49},"01M6P79J16SAK6T4CF0RDN62W6","wizard","Generate an interactive bash wizard that walks a human through a manual procedure — third-party setup, a one-off migration, an A→B state transition — opening URLs, capturing values, confirming each step, and writing .env files and GitHub Actions secrets.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fasushiroo\u002Fdotfiles\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002F.codex\u002Fskills\u002Fwizard\u002FSKILL.md",[],[145,150,151,152,153,154,155,156,157,158,159,160,161,162,100,163,164,165,166,96],"transition","party","values","manual","github actions","env","third-party","human","files","migration","interactive","Bash","secrets","actions","state","generate","github",{"skillNo":168,"name":169,"nameZh":6,"description":170,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":171,"categories":172,"keywords":173,"publishedAt":49},"01M6P79EMS5ZYR75Z3WJBZGG9P","wayfinder","Plan a huge chunk of work — more than one agent session can hold — as a shared map of decision tickets on your issue tracker, and resolve them one at a time until the way to the destination is clear.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fasushiroo\u002Fdotfiles\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002F.codex\u002Fskills\u002Fwayfinder\u002FSKILL.md",[],[169,174,175,176,177,178,179,180,181,182,100,183,184,185,43,186,187,188,189,190],"tracker","more","issue tracker","tickets","clear","as","shared","time","map","issue","session","one at a time","decision","plan","chunk","at","can"]