[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"skill:01M71SSG2C2282M5AY7JSTQ7HN":3,"skill-same:01M71SSG2C2282M5AY7JSTQ7HN":88},{"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":58,"commitSha":59,"skillDirectory":60,"forksCount":61,"repositoryHtmlUrl":62,"repositoryHomepageUrl":63,"ownerHtmlUrl":64,"ownerBlogUrl":65,"ownerDescription":66,"updatedAt":67,"install":68,"resources":81},"01M71SSG2C2282M5AY7JSTQ7HN","receiving-code-review",null,"Evaluate code review feedback with technical rigor and verification — never performative agreement or blind implementation","HigorAlves\u002Forc","HigorAlves","https:\u002F\u002Favatars.githubusercontent.com\u002Fu\u002F11262976?v=4","01M71S79EZEMHZ8PQSV0XQJHYY","Higor Alves","01M71S79FKKTCHCN1EDR8DSTWQ",7,"MIT","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHigorAlves\u002Forc\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Forc\u002Fskills\u002Freceiving-code-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],"code","review","receiving code review","code review","implementation","https","evaluate","github","with","use","technical","review feedback","feedback","verification","agreement","when","superpowers","implementing","code review feedback","never","2026-11-10 13:02:02",false,"---\nname: receiving-code-review\ndescription: Evaluate code review feedback with technical rigor and verification — never performative agreement or blind implementation\nwhen_to_use: Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions.\nlicense: MIT\nmetadata:\n  author: Jesse Vincent\n  source: Derived from https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fobra\u002Fsuperpowers\n---\n\n# Code Review Reception\n\n## Overview\n\nCode review requires technical evaluation, not emotional performance.\n\n**Core principle:** Verify before implementing. Ask before assuming. Technical correctness over social comfort.\n\n## The Response Pattern\n\n```\nWHEN receiving code review feedback:\n\n1. READ: Complete feedback without reacting\n2. UNDERSTAND: Restate requirement in own words (or ask)\n3. VERIFY: Check against codebase reality\n4. EVALUATE: Technically sound for THIS codebase?\n5. RESPOND: Technical acknowledgment or reasoned pushback\n6. IMPLEMENT: One item at a time, test each\n```\n\n## Forbidden Responses\n\n**NEVER:**\n- \"You're absolutely right!\" (explicit CLAUDE.md violation)\n- \"Great point!\" \u002F \"Excellent feedback!\" (performative)\n- \"Let me implement that now\" (before verification)\n\n**INSTEAD:**\n- Restate the technical requirement\n- Ask clarifying questions\n- Push back with technical reasoning if wrong\n- Just start working (actions > words)\n\n## Handling Unclear Feedback\n\n```\nIF any item is unclear:\n  STOP - do not implement anything yet\n  ASK for clarification on unclear items\n\nWHY: Items may be related. Partial understanding = wrong implementation.\n```\n\n**Example:**\n```\nyour human partner: \"Fix 1-6\"\nYou understand 1,2,3,6. Unclear on 4,5.\n\n❌ WRONG: Implement 1,2,3,6 now, ask about 4,5 later\n✅ RIGHT: \"I understand items 1,2,3,6. Need clarification on 4 and 5 before proceeding.\"\n```\n\n## Source-Specific Handling\n\n### From your human partner\n- **Trusted** - implement after understanding\n- **Still ask** if scope unclear\n- **No performative agreement**\n- **Skip to action** or technical acknowledgment\n\n### From External Reviewers\n```\nBEFORE implementing:\n  1. Check: Technically correct for THIS codebase?\n  2. Check: Breaks existing functionality?\n  3. Check: Reason for current implementation?\n  4. Check: Works on all platforms\u002Fversions?\n  5. Check: Does reviewer understand full context?\n\nIF suggestion seems wrong:\n  Push back with technical reasoning\n\nIF can't easily verify:\n  Say so: \"I can't verify this without [X]. Should I [investigate\u002Fask\u002Fproceed]?\"\n\nIF conflicts with your human partner's prior decisions:\n  Stop and discuss with your human partner first\n```\n\n**your human partner's rule:** \"External feedback - be skeptical, but check carefully\"\n\n## YAGNI Check for \"Professional\" Features\n\n```\nIF reviewer suggests \"implementing properly\":\n  grep codebase for actual usage\n\n  IF unused: \"This endpoint isn't called. Remove it (YAGNI)?\"\n  IF used: Then implement properly\n```\n\n**your human partner's rule:** \"You and reviewer both report to me. If we don't need this feature, don't add it.\"\n\n## Implementation Order\n\n```\nFOR multi-item feedback:\n  1. Clarify anything unclear FIRST\n  2. Then implement in this order:\n     - Blocking issues (breaks, security)\n     - Simple fixes (typos, imports)\n     - Complex fixes (refactoring, logic)\n  3. Test each fix individually\n  4. Verify no regressions\n```\n\n## When To Push Back\n\nPush back when:\n- Suggestion breaks existing functionality\n- Reviewer lacks full context\n- Violates YAGNI (unused feature)\n- Technically incorrect for this stack\n- Legacy\u002Fcompatibility reasons exist\n- Conflicts with your human partner's architectural decisions\n\n**How to push back:**\n- Use technical reasoning, not defensiveness\n- Ask specific questions\n- Reference working tests\u002Fcode\n- Involve your human partner if architectural\n\n**Signal if uncomfortable pushing back out loud:** \"Strange things are afoot at the Circle K\"\n\n## Acknowledging Correct Feedback\n\nWhen feedback IS correct:\n```\n✅ \"Fixed. [Brief description of what changed]\"\n✅ \"Good catch - [specific issue]. Fixed in [location].\"\n✅ [Just fix it and show in the code]\n\n❌ \"You're absolutely right!\"\n❌ \"Great point!\"\n❌ \"Thanks for catching that!\"\n❌ \"Thanks for [anything]\"\n❌ ANY gratitude expression\n```\n\n**Why no thanks:** Actions speak. Just fix it. The code itself shows you heard the feedback.\n\n**If you catch yourself about to write \"Thanks\":** DELETE IT. State the fix instead.\n\n## Gracefully Correcting Your Pushback\n\nIf you pushed back and were wrong:\n```\n✅ \"You were right - I checked [X] and it does [Y]. Implementing now.\"\n✅ \"Verified this and you're correct. My initial understanding was wrong because [reason]. Fixing.\"\n\n❌ Long apology\n❌ Defending why you pushed back\n❌ Over-explaining\n```\n\nState the correction factually and move on.\n\n## Common Mistakes and Real Examples\n\nMistake → fix table and bad\u002Fgood reply pairs: [EXAMPLES.md](references\u002FEXAMPLES.md). Read it when a draft reply feels performative.\n\n## GitHub Thread Replies\n\nWhen replying to inline review comments on GitHub, reply in the comment thread (`gh api repos\u002F{owner}\u002F{repo}\u002Fpulls\u002F{pr}\u002Fcomments\u002F{id}\u002Freplies`), not as a top-level PR comment.\n\n## The Bottom Line\n\n**External feedback = suggestions to evaluate, not orders to follow.**\n\nVerify. Question. Then implement.\n\nNo performative agreement. Technical rigor always.\n","# Code Review Reception\n\n## Overview\n\nCode review requires technical evaluation, not emotional performance.\n\n**Core principle:** Verify before implementing. Ask before assuming. Technical correctness over social comfort.\n\n## The Response Pattern\n\n```\nWHEN receiving code review feedback:\n\n1. READ: Complete feedback without reacting\n2. UNDERSTAND: Restate requirement in own words (or ask)\n3. VERIFY: Check against codebase reality\n4. EVALUATE: Technically sound for THIS codebase?\n5. RESPOND: Technical acknowledgment or reasoned pushback\n6. IMPLEMENT: One item at a time, test each\n```\n\n## Forbidden Responses\n\n**NEVER:**\n- \"You're absolutely right!\" (explicit CLAUDE.md violation)\n- \"Great point!\" \u002F \"Excellent feedback!\" (performative)\n- \"Let me implement that now\" (before verification)\n\n**INSTEAD:**\n- Restate the technical requirement\n- Ask clarifying questions\n- Push back with technical reasoning if wrong\n- Just start working (actions > words)\n\n## Handling Unclear Feedback\n\n```\nIF any item is unclear:\n  STOP - do not implement anything yet\n  ASK for clarification on unclear items\n\nWHY: Items may be related. Partial understanding = wrong implementation.\n```\n\n**Example:**\n```\nyour human partner: \"Fix 1-6\"\nYou understand 1,2,3,6. Unclear on 4,5.\n\n❌ WRONG: Implement 1,2,3,6 now, ask about 4,5 later\n✅ RIGHT: \"I understand items 1,2,3,6. Need clarification on 4 and 5 before proceeding.\"\n```\n\n## Source-Specific Handling\n\n### From your human partner\n- **Trusted** - implement after understanding\n- **Still ask** if scope unclear\n- **No performative agreement**\n- **Skip to action** or technical acknowledgment\n\n### From External Reviewers\n```\nBEFORE implementing:\n  1. Check: Technically correct for THIS codebase?\n  2. Check: Breaks existing functionality?\n  3. Check: Reason for current implementation?\n  4. Check: Works on all platforms\u002Fversions?\n  5. Check: Does reviewer understand full context?\n\nIF suggestion seems wrong:\n  Push back with technical reasoning\n\nIF can't easily verify:\n  Say so: \"I can't verify this without [X]. Should I [investigate\u002Fask\u002Fproceed]?\"\n\nIF conflicts with your human partner's prior decisions:\n  Stop and discuss with your human partner first\n```\n\n**your human partner's rule:** \"External feedback - be skeptical, but check carefully\"\n\n## YAGNI Check for \"Professional\" Features\n\n```\nIF reviewer suggests \"implementing properly\":\n  grep codebase for actual usage\n\n  IF unused: \"This endpoint isn't called. Remove it (YAGNI)?\"\n  IF used: Then implement properly\n```\n\n**your human partner's rule:** \"You and reviewer both report to me. If we don't need this feature, don't add it.\"\n\n## Implementation Order\n\n```\nFOR multi-item feedback:\n  1. Clarify anything unclear FIRST\n  2. Then implement in this order:\n     - Blocking issues (breaks, security)\n     - Simple fixes (typos, imports)\n     - Complex fixes (refactoring, logic)\n  3. Test each fix individually\n  4. Verify no regressions\n```\n\n## When To Push Back\n\nPush back when:\n- Suggestion breaks existing functionality\n- Reviewer lacks full context\n- Violates YAGNI (unused feature)\n- Technically incorrect for this stack\n- Legacy\u002Fcompatibility reasons exist\n- Conflicts with your human partner's architectural decisions\n\n**How to push back:**\n- Use technical reasoning, not defensiveness\n- Ask specific questions\n- Reference working tests\u002Fcode\n- Involve your human partner if architectural\n\n**Signal if uncomfortable pushing back out loud:** \"Strange things are afoot at the Circle K\"\n\n## Acknowledging Correct Feedback\n\nWhen feedback IS correct:\n```\n✅ \"Fixed. [Brief description of what changed]\"\n✅ \"Good catch - [specific issue]. Fixed in [location].\"\n✅ [Just fix it and show in the code]\n\n❌ \"You're absolutely right!\"\n❌ \"Great point!\"\n❌ \"Thanks for catching that!\"\n❌ \"Thanks for [anything]\"\n❌ ANY gratitude expression\n```\n\n**Why no thanks:** Actions speak. Just fix it. The code itself shows you heard the feedback.\n\n**If you catch yourself about to write \"Thanks\":** DELETE IT. State the fix instead.\n\n## Gracefully Correcting Your Pushback\n\nIf you pushed back and were wrong:\n```\n✅ \"You were right - I checked [X] and it does [Y]. Implementing now.\"\n✅ \"Verified this and you're correct. My initial understanding was wrong because [reason]. Fixing.\"\n\n❌ Long apology\n❌ Defending why you pushed back\n❌ Over-explaining\n```\n\nState the correction factually and move on.\n\n## Common Mistakes and Real Examples\n\nMistake → fix table and bad\u002Fgood reply pairs: [EXAMPLES.md](references\u002FEXAMPLES.md). Read it when a draft reply feels performative.\n\n## GitHub Thread Replies\n\nWhen replying to inline review comments on GitHub, reply in the comment thread (`gh api repos\u002F{owner}\u002F{repo}\u002Fpulls\u002F{pr}\u002Fcomments\u002F{id}\u002Freplies`), not as a top-level PR comment.\n\n## The Bottom Line\n\n**External feedback = suggestions to evaluate, not orders to follow.**\n\nVerify. Question. Then implement.\n\nNo performative agreement. Technical rigor always.\n",{"name":5,"license":15,"metadata":54,"description":7,"when_to_use":57},{"author":55,"source":56},"Jesse Vincent","Derived from https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fobra\u002Fsuperpowers","Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions.","main","7522fd7266944e30052204c2f6df287d8b5516be","orc\u002Fskills\u002Freceiving-code-review",0,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHigorAlves\u002Forc","https:\u002F\u002Forc.novacstack.com\u002F","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHigorAlves","higoralves.dev","Software Engineering","2026-11-07 07:26:38",{"source":8,"skillName":5,"commands":69,"prompt":79,"zipAvailable":80},[70,73,76],{"tool":71,"command":72},"npx","npx skills add HigorAlves\u002Forc --skill receiving-code-review",{"tool":74,"command":75},"bunx","bunx skills add HigorAlves\u002Forc --skill receiving-code-review",{"tool":77,"command":78},"pnpm","pnpm dlx skills add HigorAlves\u002Forc --skill receiving-code-review","安装技能，技能地址：https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHigorAlves\u002Forc\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Forc\u002Fskills\u002Freceiving-code-review\u002FSKILL.md",true,[82],{"path":83,"resourceType":84,"resourceTypeDesc":85,"sizeBytes":86,"sourceHtmlUrl":87},"references\u002FEXAMPLES.md","REFERENCE","参考文档",1435,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHigorAlves\u002Forc\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Forc\u002Fskills\u002Freceiving-code-review\u002Freferences\u002FEXAMPLES.md",[89,118,142,163,184,204],{"skillNo":90,"name":91,"nameZh":6,"description":92,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":93,"categories":94,"keywords":102,"publishedAt":49},"01M71SW40F9TAAEDKBYYBCM814","writing-plans","Write a comprehensive implementation plan of bite-sized TDD tasks that an engineer with zero codebase context could execute — exact files, code, tests, and verification steps","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHigorAlves\u002Forc\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Forc\u002Fskills\u002Fwriting-plans\u002FSKILL.md",[95,98,99],{"categoryNo":96,"categoryName":97,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000018","写作与文案",{"categoryNo":24,"categoryName":25,"taxonomyType":26,"taxonomyTypeDesc":27},{"categoryNo":100,"categoryName":101,"taxonomyType":26,"taxonomyTypeDesc":27},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000036","内容创作者",[103,104,105,106,45,107,108,44,109,29,110,42,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,38],"writing","writing plans","plans","engineer","implementation plan","files","you","tasks","plan","write","steps","context","ZeRO","for","tests",{"skillNo":119,"name":120,"nameZh":6,"description":121,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":122,"categories":123,"keywords":129,"publishedAt":49},"01M71SW15KHE4MHJW9NEXV65X2","writing-for-agents","orc's doctrine layer for writing any document an agent consumes — skills, AGENTS.md\u002FCLAUDE.md, reference docs","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHigorAlves\u002Forc\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Forc\u002Fskills\u002Fwriting-for-agents\u002FSKILL.md",[124,125,128],{"categoryNo":96,"categoryName":97,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},{"categoryNo":126,"categoryName":127,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000023","Skill与智能体开发",{"categoryNo":100,"categoryName":101,"taxonomyType":26,"taxonomyTypeDesc":27},[130,103,116,131,44,132,133,134,135,136,137,138,38,139,36,34,140,141],"writing for agents","matt pocock","inline","tuning","a skill","layer","doctrine","push","editing","document","reference","docs",{"skillNo":143,"name":144,"nameZh":6,"description":145,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":146,"categories":147,"keywords":149,"publishedAt":49},"01M71SVYQKXT743HHHWGHT3G13","workspace-mode","Use when cwd is a parent dir holding multiple sibling git repos — defines repo auto-detection, --repos\u002F--repo\u002F--all-repos\u002F--this-repo precedence, per-repo dispatch, and linked-PR mechanics.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHigorAlves\u002Forc\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Forc\u002Fskills\u002Fworkspace-mode\u002FSKILL.md",[148],{"categoryNo":126,"categoryName":127,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},[150,151,152,153,154,44,155,156,157,158,38,159,160,161,162],"workspace mode","mode","workspace","mechanics","auto","repos","git","pr","repo","dispatch","auto-detection","detection","parent",{"skillNo":164,"name":165,"nameZh":6,"description":166,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":167,"categories":168,"keywords":170,"publishedAt":49},"01M71SVVP3BXS06G9395P2K0RH","wizard","Generate an interactive bash wizard walking a human through work only they can perform — credentials, secrets, one-off migrations","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHigorAlves\u002Forc\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Forc\u002Fskills\u002Fwizard\u002FSKILL.md",[169],{"categoryNo":126,"categoryName":127,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},[165,171,48,172,173,131,44,174,175,176,177,178,179,113,180,181,116,38,182,183],"condition","provisioning infrastructure","only","Bash","work","credentials","generate","human","secrets","infrastructure","do","one","interactive",{"skillNo":185,"name":186,"nameZh":6,"description":187,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":188,"categories":189,"keywords":190,"publishedAt":49},"01M71SVT4AR6NKAM5B077E7QSJ","wait-what","Stop and re-pitch — the last message did not land; say it again simply, in the project's own vocabulary.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHigorAlves\u002Forc\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Forc\u002Fskills\u002Fwait-what\u002FSKILL.md",[],[191,192,193,194,195,131,196,197,198,199,36,34,200,201,202,203],"wait what","wait","project","re","true","pitch","last","say","message","land","it","stop","vocabulary",{"skillNo":205,"name":206,"nameZh":6,"description":207,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":208,"categories":209,"keywords":214,"publishedAt":49},"01M71SVQVYRA9QBQ6G8MWR8G6F","vitest","Vitest fast unit testing framework powered by Vite with Jest-compatible API","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHigorAlves\u002Forc\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Forc\u002Fskills\u002Fvitest\u002FSKILL.md",[210,213],{"categoryNo":211,"categoryName":212,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000008","测试与质量",{"categoryNo":24,"categoryName":25,"taxonomyType":26,"taxonomyTypeDesc":27},[206,215,216,217,218,219,103,44,220,221,222,223,224,225,226,227,228,229,117,230],"coverage","unit","testing","testing framework","generated","api","jest","2026","at","scripts","unit testing","antfu","framework","vite","mocking","dev"]