caveman-review

Ultra-compressed code review comments. Cuts noise from PR feedback while preserving the actionable signal. Each comment is one line: location, problem, fix. Use when user says "review this PR", "code review", "review the diff", "/review", or invokes /caveman-review. Auto-triggers when reviewing pull requests.

242 stars

Best use case

caveman-review is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.

Ultra-compressed code review comments. Cuts noise from PR feedback while preserving the actionable signal. Each comment is one line: location, problem, fix. Use when user says "review this PR", "code review", "review the diff", "/review", or invokes /caveman-review. Auto-triggers when reviewing pull requests.

Teams using caveman-review should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.

When to use this skill

  • You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.

When not to use this skill

  • You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
  • You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.

Installation

Claude Code / Cursor / Codex

$curl -o ~/.claude/skills/caveman-review/SKILL.md --create-dirs "https://raw.githubusercontent.com/aiskillstore/marketplace/main/skills/juliusbrussee/caveman-review/SKILL.md"

Manual Installation

  1. Download SKILL.md from GitHub
  2. Place it in .claude/skills/caveman-review/SKILL.md inside your project
  3. Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill

How caveman-review Compares

Feature / Agentcaveman-reviewStandard Approach
Platform SupportNot specifiedLimited / Varies
Context Awareness High Baseline
Installation ComplexityUnknownN/A

Frequently Asked Questions

What does this skill do?

Ultra-compressed code review comments. Cuts noise from PR feedback while preserving the actionable signal. Each comment is one line: location, problem, fix. Use when user says "review this PR", "code review", "review the diff", "/review", or invokes /caveman-review. Auto-triggers when reviewing pull requests.

Where can I find the source code?

You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.

Related Guides

SKILL.md Source

Write code review comments terse and actionable. One line per finding. Location, problem, fix. No throat-clearing.

## Rules

**Format:** `L<line>: <problem>. <fix>.` — or `<file>:L<line>: ...` when reviewing multi-file diffs.

**Severity prefix (optional, when mixed):**
- `🔴 bug:` — broken behavior, will cause incident
- `🟡 risk:` — works but fragile (race, missing null check, swallowed error)
- `🔵 nit:` — style, naming, micro-optim. Author can ignore
- `❓ q:` — genuine question, not a suggestion

**Drop:**
- "I noticed that...", "It seems like...", "You might want to consider..."
- "This is just a suggestion but..." — use `nit:` instead
- "Great work!", "Looks good overall but..." — say it once at the top, not per comment
- Restating what the line does — the reviewer can read the diff
- Hedging ("perhaps", "maybe", "I think") — if unsure use `q:`

**Keep:**
- Exact line numbers
- Exact symbol/function/variable names in backticks
- Concrete fix, not "consider refactoring this"
- The *why* if the fix isn't obvious from the problem statement

## Examples

❌ "I noticed that on line 42 you're not checking if the user object is null before accessing the email property. This could potentially cause a crash if the user is not found in the database. You might want to add a null check here."

✅ `L42: 🔴 bug: user can be null after .find(). Add guard before .email.`

❌ "It looks like this function is doing a lot of things and might benefit from being broken up into smaller functions for readability."

✅ `L88-140: 🔵 nit: 50-line fn does 4 things. Extract validate/normalize/persist.`

❌ "Have you considered what happens if the API returns a 429? I think we should probably handle that case."

✅ `L23: 🟡 risk: no retry on 429. Wrap in withBackoff(3).`

## Auto-Clarity

Drop terse mode for: security findings (CVE-class bugs need full explanation + reference), architectural disagreements (need rationale, not just a one-liner), and onboarding contexts where the author is new and needs the "why". In those cases write a normal paragraph, then resume terse for the rest.

## Boundaries

Reviews only — does not write the code fix, does not approve/request-changes, does not run linters. Output the comment(s) ready to paste into the PR. "stop caveman-review" or "normal mode": revert to verbose review style.

Related Skills

woocommerce-code-review

242
from aiskillstore/marketplace

Review WooCommerce code changes for coding standards compliance. Use when reviewing code locally, performing automated PR reviews, or checking code quality.

security-review

242
from aiskillstore/marketplace

Use this skill when adding authentication, handling user input, working with secrets, creating API endpoints, or implementing payment/sensitive features. Provides comprehensive security checklist and patterns.

performance-testing-review-multi-agent-review

242
from aiskillstore/marketplace

Use when working with performance testing review multi agent review

performance-testing-review-ai-review

242
from aiskillstore/marketplace

You are an expert AI-powered code review specialist combining automated static analysis, intelligent pattern recognition, and modern DevOps practices. Leverage AI tools (GitHub Copilot, Qodo, GPT-5, C

fix-review

242
from aiskillstore/marketplace

Verify fix commits address audit findings without new bugs

error-debugging-multi-agent-review

242
from aiskillstore/marketplace

Use when working with error debugging multi agent review

comprehensive-review-pr-enhance

242
from aiskillstore/marketplace

You are a PR optimization expert specializing in creating high-quality pull requests that facilitate efficient code reviews. Generate comprehensive PR descriptions, automate review processes, and ensure PRs follow best practices for clarity, size, and reviewability.

comprehensive-review-full-review

242
from aiskillstore/marketplace

Use when working with comprehensive review full review

codex-review

242
from aiskillstore/marketplace

Professional code review with auto CHANGELOG generation, integrated with Codex AI

code-review-excellence

242
from aiskillstore/marketplace

Master effective code review practices to provide constructive feedback, catch bugs early, and foster knowledge sharing while maintaining team morale. Use when reviewing pull requests, establishing review standards, or mentoring developers.

code-review-checklist

242
from aiskillstore/marketplace

Comprehensive checklist for conducting thorough code reviews covering functionality, security, performance, and maintainability

code-review-ai-ai-review

242
from aiskillstore/marketplace

You are an expert AI-powered code review specialist combining automated static analysis, intelligent pattern recognition, and modern DevOps practices. Leverage AI tools (GitHub Copilot, Qodo, GPT-5, C