Can this skill be used for manual code reviews?

Yes, it provides a specific protocol for receiving and evaluating feedback from human partners to ensure clarity and technical correctness before implementation.

How does the subagent review process work?

It uses git SHAs to identify changes and dispatches a dedicated code-reviewer subagent to evaluate the work against original requirements and best practices.

Why does this skill discourage 'performative agreement'?

It prioritizes technical accuracy over social politeness to prevent 'hallucinated' progress and ensure that reviewers and developers are aligned on actual technical requirements.

What is 'The Iron Law' of verification?

The Iron Law dictates that no completion claims (such as 'tests pass' or 'work is complete') can be made without providing fresh evidence from actual command outputs.

Advanced Code Review Rigor

Name: Advanced Code Review Rigor
Author: mrgoonie

bymrgoonie

•

1,395

Collaboration Tools

Enforces technical rigor and evidence-based verification gates to ensure code quality and prevent false completion claims.

About

The Advanced Code Review skill transforms how Claude handles the development lifecycle by prioritizing technical correctness over social comfort. It implements a structured protocol for receiving feedback, requesting automated reviews via subagents, and enforcing 'The Iron Law'—a requirement that no task can be claimed as complete without fresh, verifiable evidence. By replacing performative agreement with rigorous verification gates, this skill ensures that tests pass, builds succeed, and requirements are met with documented proof before any status updates are provided.

Key Features

1,395 GitHub stars
Technical rigor protocol to evaluate feedback without performative agreement
Mandatory verification gates requiring fresh test and build evidence
Integration with subagent-driven development workflows and PR processes
Automated review requests using specialized code-reviewer subagents
Systematic decision trees for handling unclear or conflicting feedback

Use Cases

Navigating technically questionable feedback from external reviewers
Validating major features and refactors before merging into the main branch
Enforcing evidence-based progress reporting in subagent-driven development

About

Key Features

1,395 GitHub stars
Technical rigor protocol to evaluate feedback without performative agreement
Mandatory verification gates requiring fresh test and build evidence
Integration with subagent-driven development workflows and PR processes
Automated review requests using specialized code-reviewer subagents
Systematic decision trees for handling unclear or conflicting feedback

Use Cases

Navigating technically questionable feedback from external reviewers
Validating major features and refactors before merging into the main branch
Enforcing evidence-based progress reporting in subagent-driven development