Total 52,164 skills, Code Quality has 2355 skills
Showing 12 of 2355 skills
Use when entering an unfamiliar codebase, onboarding to a new project, or wanting to assess codebase health before reading code — analyzes git history to reveal hotspots, risk areas, team structure, and development momentum
Debug systematically: observe, hypothesize, test, fix, verify.
Post-implementation cleanup that removes AI-generated bloat while preserving functionality. Runs pass-by-pass with test verification after each pass. Activate after kraken/spark complete a feature, or when a codebase needs hygiene work.
Use when given a GitHub issue URL or number to investigate and implement a fix. Triggers on "fix issue", "fix bug", "fix
This skill should be used when the user wants to review code, audit a diff, get a second opinion on changes, or run an adversarial review of files in the current working tree. Common triggers include "review this code", "audit this diff", "find issues in", "second opinion on this", "harsh review of", "adversarial review", and "security review of". Picks one or more reviewer personas (adversarial, security, architecture, performance). Reviews local files, `git diff`, or `git diff --staged` only — does not fetch external content. Runs in one of four modes: single-agent (one persona in the current agent), cross-model handoff (independent second opinion via another local AI CLI, with secret-shield preflight + prompt-shield wrap), multi-bg-agent (one persona per parallel background subagent), or agent-team (Claude Code Teams or equivalent on supporting agents). Skip when the user wants formatting fixes (use a linter) or refactoring patterns (use ts-best-practices or ts-best-practices-functional).
Fix confirmed bugs from user reports, runtime failures, failing tests, or verified `/find-bugs` findings. Reproduce the bug first, diagnose the real root cause, apply the smallest correct fix, verify against regressions, and report exactly what changed. Loads framework-specific references and category-specific playbooks as needed. Use when the user says "fix this bug", "fix the findings", "/bugfix", or asks to repair a confirmed defect.
arthrod's coding philosophy and dispatcher. Universal red-green TDD, stacked PRs, test-always, evidence-before-claims. Routes to conejo-code (active coding), conejo-frontend (strict UI), conejo-merge (calm PR/merge). Use when starting any coding work or deciding how to approach a task.
Use when writing, reviewing, or committing code to enforce Karpathy's 4 coding principles — surface assumptions before coding, keep it simple, make surgical changes, define verifiable goals. Triggers on "review my diff", "check complexity", "am I overcomplicating this", "karpathy check", "before I commit", or any code quality concern where the LLM might be overcoding.
Code review of current git changes, compare to related plan if exists, identify bad engineering, over-engineering, or suboptimal solutions. Use when user asks to review changes, check git diff, validate implementation quality, or assess code changes.
Review a merge request or branch. Compares a branch against main/master, summarizes changes, highlights concerns, and provides actionable feedback. Use for PR reviews or before merging.
Adversarial senior review of the spec before any code is written. Constructs a skeptical reviewer whose authority comes from the codebase, §R research, and live best-practice — then tries to REFUTE the spec, not rubber-stamp it. Every finding cites evidence (file:line or source); unverifiable ones are flagged. Survivors harden §V; the run ends in an explicit go / no-go gate. Triggers before building anything high-blast-radius, when the user says "review the spec", "red-team this", "is this plan sound", "senior review", or invokes /ck:review.
Rework a change as if the intended UX and architecture existed from day one, deleting compatibility cruft and accidental complexity.