What is the 'Technical Correctness over Social Comfort' principle?

This core philosophy encourages developers to focus on the reality of the codebase and evidence-based decisions rather than using performative or empty agreements like 'Great point!'

How does this skill improve the code review process?

It provides a standardized framework for communication, ensuring that feedback is fully understood, technically verified against the codebase, and implemented in a logical, testable order.

Can this skill help with pushing back on reviewer suggestions?

Yes, it includes specific criteria for when to push back—such as when a suggestion violates YAGNI or breaks existing functionality—and provides templates for doing so with technical evidence.

When should I use the code-review skill?

Use it when preparing a pull request, after receiving feedback from a human or automated reviewer, before merging major features, or when you need a fresh perspective on complex bugs.

Code Review Professional

Name: Code Review Professional
Author: eyadsibai

byeyadsibai

Collaboration Tools

Optimizes the end-to-end code review process by providing structured patterns for requesting feedback and implementing technical suggestions.

About

The code-review skill for Claude Code streamlines how developers handle pull requests and technical feedback loops. It establishes a rigorous framework for both sides of the review process, focusing on technical correctness and clear communication over performative social cues. By prioritizing evidence-based responses and a structured implementation order, this skill helps teams maintain high code quality, ensure comprehensive understanding of requirements, and handle disagreements with objective, technical reasoning.

Key Features

Standardized response protocols prioritizing technical accuracy over social comfort
0 GitHub stars
Structured patterns for requesting and receiving technical feedback
Guidelines for identifying mandatory versus valuable review situations
Systematic implementation order for handling multi-item reviewer feedback
Evidence-based pushback criteria for architectural or technical conflicts

Use Cases

Managing technical disagreements with reviewers using structured, non-defensive reasoning
Systematically processing and clarifying complex reviewer feedback before implementation
Preparing comprehensive pull requests with full context, requirements, and SHA references

About

Key Features

Standardized response protocols prioritizing technical accuracy over social comfort
0 GitHub stars
Structured patterns for requesting and receiving technical feedback
Guidelines for identifying mandatory versus valuable review situations
Systematic implementation order for handling multi-item reviewer feedback
Evidence-based pushback criteria for architectural or technical conflicts

Use Cases

Managing technical disagreements with reviewers using structured, non-defensive reasoning
Systematically processing and clarifying complex reviewer feedback before implementation
Preparing comprehensive pull requests with full context, requirements, and SHA references