code-review
8
总安装量
6
周安装量
#34865
全站排名
安装命令
npx skills add https://github.com/woowooyong/curl-ticket --skill code-review
Agent 安装分布
opencode
6
claude-code
6
github-copilot
6
codex
6
kimi-cli
6
gemini-cli
6
Skill 文档
Code Review
Perform thorough code reviews for the Curl Ticket project (Nuxt 4 + Vue 3 + Drizzle ORM + Supabase Auth + Zod).
Review Process
- Identify scope â determine which files changed and their categories (API route, component, schema, shared code)
- Read changed files â read each file fully before reviewing
- Apply category checklist â use the relevant sections from references/checklist.md
- Report findings â output structured review with severity levels
Review Categories
Based on the changed files, apply the matching checks:
| File path pattern | Checklist sections to apply |
|---|---|
server/api/** |
API Route, Security, Error Handling |
app/components/**, app/pages/** |
Vue Component, Security (XSS) |
server/database/schema/** |
Database & Schema |
shared/schemas/**, shared/constants.ts |
Validation & Types |
app/composables/** |
Vue Component (data fetching), Performance |
server/utils/**, server/middleware/** |
API Route (auth), Security, Error Handling |
Always apply Security Review regardless of file type.
For the full checklist, read references/checklist.md.
Critical Project Rules
These are the most common mistakes â flag immediately:
- Missing project access check: Any
server/api/projects/[projectId]/**route MUST callgetAccessibleProject()orbuildProjectAccessCondition() - Raw string enums: Use
IssueStatus.Open,HttpMethod.GET, etc. fromshared/constants.tsâ never raw strings - Raw fetch in components: Must use
useFetchor project composables for SSR compatibility - Options API usage: All components must use
<script setup lang="ts"> - Missing Zod validation: All API request bodies must be validated with shared Zod schemas
- Error helpers: Use
notFound(),forbidden(),badRequest(),unauthorized()fromserver/utils/errors.ts - v-html with user input: Flag as high-severity security issue
Output Format
Structure review output as:
## Code Review: [brief description]
### Summary
[1-2 sentence overview of changes and overall assessment]
### Findings
#### ð´ Critical
- **[file:line]**: [description and fix]
#### ð¡ Suggestions
- **[file:line]**: [description and suggestion]
#### ð¢ Good Patterns
- [note positive patterns worth highlighting]
### Verdict
[APPROVE / REQUEST_CHANGES / COMMENT â with brief rationale]
Omit empty severity sections. If no issues found, state the code looks good with brief justification.