review-bug-fixer

📁 ilamanov/skills 📅 1 day ago
1
总安装量
1
周安装量
#54834
全站排名
安装命令
npx skills add https://github.com/ilamanov/skills --skill review-bug-fixer

Agent 安装分布

amp 1
opencode 1
kimi-cli 1
codex 1
claude-code 1

Skill 文档

Review Bug Fixer

Fix valid code review findings from arbitrary review markdown files against the current branch.

Workflow

  1. Collect review files — Read all review files the user provides (e.g., review1.md, review2.md, review3.md). Accept any number of files in any format (structured or free-form).

  2. Build a unified issue list — Extract every distinct finding across all files. Deduplicate: if multiple files flag the same issue (same file + same concern), merge them into one entry. Preserve the strongest/clearest description.

  3. Triage each finding — Classify every finding into one of:

    • Fix — Valid bug, logic error, security issue, or correctness problem. Apply the fix.
    • Skip — Ignore if any of these apply:
      • Nit or style-only (naming preferences, formatting, comment wording)
      • Not actually valid (misunderstanding of the code, already handled, false positive)
      • Overly defensive (adds complexity for scenarios that realistically won’t occur — e.g., redundant null checks on values guaranteed by the framework, error handling for impossible states, excessive input validation on internal-only code paths)

    When in doubt, lean toward skipping. The goal is to fix real bugs, not gold-plate the code.

  4. Fix valid issues — For each “Fix” finding:

    • Read the relevant source file if not already read
    • Apply the minimal change that addresses the issue
    • Do not refactor surrounding code or add unrelated improvements
  5. Report summary — After all fixes, output a brief summary:

    ## Review fixes applied
    
    ### Fixed
    - <file:line> — <one-line description>
    
    ### Skipped (not valid / nit / overly defensive)
    - <one-line description> — <reason skipped>
    

Guidelines

  • Never create new files unless a finding explicitly requires it.
  • Keep fixes minimal and focused — one concern per edit.
  • If a finding is ambiguous or could go either way, skip it and mention it in the summary so the user can decide.
  • If two findings conflict, skip both and flag in the summary.
  • Preserve existing code style (indentation, naming conventions, patterns).