code-review
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/spec asked for?). Runs both reviews in parallel sub-agents and reports them side by side.
- Kind
- Skill
- Works with
- Claude Code
- Source
- mattpocock/skills @ 24fe0ef7737e
- Path
- skills/engineering/code-review/SKILL.md
- License
- MIT
- Jobs
- Review
InstallCopy it from the source repository, or sign in and let the assistant adapt it for your project.
Two-axis review of the diff between `HEAD` and a fixed point the user supplies: - **Standards**: does the code conform to this repo's documented coding standards? - **Spec**: does the code faithfully implement the originating issue / spec? Both axes run as **parallel sub-agents** so they don't pollute each other's context, then this skill aggregates their findings. The issue tracker should have been provided to you. If `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` is missing, tell the user to run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`. ## Process ### 1. Pin the fixed point Whatever 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. Capture the diff command once: `git diff <fixed-point>...HEAD` (three-dot, so the comparison is against the merge-base). Also note the list of commits via `git log <fixed-point>..HEAD --oneline`. Before going further, confirm the fixed point resolves (`git rev-parse <fixed-point>`) and the diff is non-empty. A bad ref or empty diff should fail here, not inside two parallel sub-agents. ### 2. Identify the spec source Look for the originating spec, in this order: …