ln-162-skill-reviewer
Reviews skills (D1-D11 + M1-M6 criteria) or .claude/commands for quality. Use when validating skill correctness before release.
Best use case
ln-162-skill-reviewer is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Reviews skills (D1-D11 + M1-M6 criteria) or .claude/commands for quality. Use when validating skill correctness before release.
Teams using ln-162-skill-reviewer 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
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/ln-162-skill-reviewer/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How ln-162-skill-reviewer Compares
| Feature / Agent | ln-162-skill-reviewer | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Reviews skills (D1-D11 + M1-M6 criteria) or .claude/commands for quality. Use when validating skill correctness before release.
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
AI Agents for Coding
Browse AI agent skills for coding, debugging, testing, refactoring, code review, and developer workflows across Claude, Cursor, and Codex.
Best AI Skills for Claude
Explore the best AI skills for Claude and Claude Code across coding, research, workflow automation, documentation, and agent operations.
Cursor vs Codex for AI Workflows
Compare Cursor and Codex for AI coding workflows, repository assistance, debugging, refactoring, and reusable developer skills.
SKILL.md Source
> **Paths:** File paths (`shared/`, `references/`, `../ln-*`) are relative to skills repo root. If not found at CWD, locate this SKILL.md directory and go up one level for repo root. If `shared/` is missing, fetch files via WebFetch from `https://raw.githubusercontent.com/levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills/master/skills/{path}`.
# ln-162-skill-reviewer
**Type:** L3 Worker (standalone-capable)
**Category:** 1XX Documentation Pipeline
Universal reviewer with two modes:
- `SKILL` for `ln-*/SKILL.md`
- `COMMAND` for `.claude/commands/*.md`
> **Plan Mode behavior:** Phases 1-4 and 6-7 are research. Run them fully in Plan Mode, write the report plus fix list into the plan, and apply edits only after approval.
---
## Mode Detection
| Condition | Mode | Review Profile |
|-----------|------|----------------|
| `ln-*/SKILL.md` files exist in CWD | SKILL | Full D1-D11 + M1-M6 |
| `.claude/commands/*.md` files exist | COMMAND | Structural + actionability |
| Both exist | SKILL | Override with `$ARGUMENTS=commands` |
## Input
`$ARGUMENTS` options:
- empty -> auto-detect mode and scope
- `ln-400 ln-500` -> SKILL mode, specific skills
- `commands` -> COMMAND mode, all `.claude/commands/*.md`
- `deploy.md run-tests.md` -> COMMAND mode, specific files
When invoked by another skill, file paths may be passed directly.
---
## SKILL Mode
### Phase 1: Scope Detection
If `$ARGUMENTS` is provided:
- treat each token as a skill directory prefix
- glob `{prefix}*/SKILL.md`
If `$ARGUMENTS` is empty:
- inspect git diff, staged files, and untracked files
- collect primary skill dirs
- collect affected skills referencing changed shared files
- collect dependency skills from worker tables and `Skill()` invocations
Report:
`Scope: {N} primary, {M} affected, {K} dependency skills.`
### Phase 2: Automated Verification
Run:
```bash
bash references/run_checks.sh {scoped SKILL.md files}
```
Automated failures are pre-verified. Record every one.
### Phase 3: Structural Review
**MANDATORY READ:** Load `references/structural_review.md`, `shared/references/skill_contract.md`, `shared/references/mcp_applicability_matrix.md`, and `shared/references/mcp_tool_preferences.md`
Review every skill in scope across D1-D11.
Treat these as structural issues, not style nits:
- missing `**Type:**` when role-sensitive checks depend on it
- worker independence violations in L3 workers
- broken shared paths
- stale root-doc assumptions after `AGENTS.md canonical / CLAUDE.md thin shim`
- markdown-analysis skills missing `markdown_read_protocol.md`
- extraction or audit skills contradicting the shared docs-quality contract
- skills contradicting the shared skill contract
- skills that should make `hex-line` primary but only describe built-in file tools
- skills that should make `hex-graph` primary but still describe grep/manual analysis as the default path
- skills that add `hex-graph` or `hex-line` with no real applicability per the shared matrix
- wrong MCP namespaces such as `mcp__hex_graph__...`
### Phase 4: Intent Review
**MANDATORY READ:** Load `references/intent_review.md`
Apply M1-M6 to primary skills only. Read the git diff for each primary skill.
### Phase 5: Fix
Auto-fix deterministic issues:
- wrong paths
- stale references
- duplicated wording
- worker-independence violations with exact removals
- copied docs shell sections in command files
Do not guess on ambiguous behavior.
After fixes, re-read each primary skill end-to-end and compress redundant wording without changing behavior.
### Phase 6: Report
Verdict rules:
- any structural violation not auto-fixed -> `FAIL`
- only advisory intent concerns remain -> `PASS with CONCERNS`
- zero findings -> `PASS`
Report format:
```text
## Skill Coherence Review -- {PASS|PASS with CONCERNS|FAIL}
**Scope:** {reviewed skills}
**Verdict:** {verdict}
```
### Phase 7: Volatile Numbers Cleanup
Remove stale aggregate counts from SKILL.md files. Keep only local counts intrinsic to the reviewed file.
---
## COMMAND Mode
**MANDATORY READ:** Load `references/command_review_criteria.md`
### Phase 1: Scope Detection
- explicit file paths -> review those files
- `commands` -> glob `.claude/commands/*.md`
- coordinator-supplied file list -> review those files
### Phase 2: Review
For each command file:
- apply all command review criteria
- verify source provenance
- verify no copied docs shell sections remain
### Phase 3: Fix
Auto-fix where safe:
- missing frontmatter
- missing `allowed-tools`
- description too long
- missing `Last Updated`
- exact copied docs shell sections
### Phase 4: Report
```text
## Command Review -- {N} files
| File | Verdict | Issues |
|------|---------|--------|
Verdicts: PASS / FIXED / WARN / FAIL
Pass rate: {X}%
```
---
## Rules
- Automated checks are non-negotiable.
- Read all scoped files before reporting.
- Fix deterministic issues immediately.
- Do not update versions or dates unless the user explicitly requests it.
- `shared/` changes affect all referencing skills.
- Worker independence is mandatory for L3 workers:
- no `**Coordinator:**`
- no `**Parent:**`
- no required caller declaration
- Docs-model drift is a structural defect, not a preference.
- `Agent Teams` / `TeamCreate` are deprecated outside clearly marked historical references.
## Reference Files
- `references/structural_review.md`
- `references/intent_review.md`
- `references/automated_checks.md`
- `references/run_checks.sh`
- `references/deprecated_apis.md`
- `references/command_review_criteria.md`
- `references/check_marketplace.mjs`
## Definition of Done
- [ ] Scope detected
- [ ] Automated checks executed
- [ ] D1-D11 reviewed across all scoped skills
- [ ] M1-M6 evaluated for primary skills
- [ ] Fixable findings auto-fixed
- [ ] Post-fix holistic compaction completed
- [ ] Final verdict report generated
---
**Version:** 1.0.0
**Last Updated:** 2026-03-26Related Skills
ln-402-task-reviewer
Reviews task implementation for quality, code standards, and test coverage. Use when task is in To Review. Sets task Done or To Rework.
ln-914-community-responder
Responds to unanswered GitHub discussions and issues with codebase-informed replies. Use when clearing community question backlog.
ln-913-community-debater
Launches RFC and debate discussions on GitHub. Use when proposing changes that need community input or voting.
ln-912-community-announcer
Composes and publishes announcements to GitHub Discussions. Use when sharing releases, updates, or news with the community.
ln-911-github-triager
Produces prioritized triage report from open GitHub issues, PRs, and discussions. Use when reviewing community backlog.
ln-910-community-engagement
Analyzes community health and delegates engagement tasks. Use when managing GitHub issues, discussions, and announcements.
ln-840-benchmark-compare
Runs built-in vs hex-line benchmark with scenario manifests, activation checks, and diff-based correctness. Use when measuring hex-line MCP performance against built-in tools.
ln-832-bundle-optimizer
Reduces JS/TS bundle size via tree-shaking, code splitting, and unused dependency removal. Use when optimizing frontend bundle size.
ln-831-oss-replacer
Replaces custom modules with OSS packages using atomic keep/discard testing. Use when migrating custom code to established libraries.
ln-830-code-modernization-coordinator
Modernizes codebase via OSS replacement and bundle optimization. Use when acting on audit findings to reduce custom code.
ln-823-pip-upgrader
Upgrades Python pip/poetry/pipenv dependencies with breaking change handling. Use when updating Python dependencies.
ln-822-nuget-upgrader
Upgrades .NET NuGet packages with breaking change handling. Use when updating .NET dependencies.