SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

AB ia-code-review

Structured code reviews with severity-ranked findings and deep multi-agent mode. Use when performing a code review, auditing code quality, or critiquing PRs, MRs, or diffs. For the full multi-agent workflow, use the ia-review command (/ia-review in Claude Code).

ClawHub Agent Skills author: Ilia Alshanetsky v4.5.2 MIT-0 22 files body ≈ 1 930 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai↗ analyzed 3 d ago

As a process B 65/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: when it triggers, inputs and preconditions, consistency

AnalyzerSoftware developmentAI and agentstype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: OpenClaw Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor GitHub Copilot / VS Code Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
A
94/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
99
Quality 40%
86
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
B
65/100
Nearly there
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
When it triggers w 12
20
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
    • A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.

    Guard findings · 1

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Medium and low: 1
    • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/security-test-coverage.md:19
      Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use) (test fixture / example file)
      - [ ] Vertical privilege escalation: regular user hitting admin routes → denied
      fixture

    Files scanned: 22. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "class"

    Process rating: all ten parameters 65/100

    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (ia-code-review) differs from the folder (compound-eng-code-review)
    • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
    • 85Steps. 6 steps, 1 vague phrases
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Failures and branches. 1 branches, has a failure section
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1930 tokens
    • 100Running it twice. No mutating operations

    Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.

    Quality signals

    • +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
    • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
    • +4No input/output examples
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +3Description length 262: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 6 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 6 items
    • +3Output format is stated explicitly
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (19 of 19)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 86.

    External checks

    ClawHub: clean
    This is a Markdown-only code review skill whose repository access, verification steps, subagent use, and optional external review flow are disclosed and bounded by user consent and read-only review rules.
    LLM: benign (high) · VirusTotal: · 8 Sept 2026