How does this skill handle external versus trusted reviewers?

It applies a higher level of skepticism to external reviewers, checking for context-specific errors and platform compatibility before implementation, while still requiring technical verification for trusted partners.

Why does this skill discourage saying 'Thank you' or 'Great point'?

It prioritizes technical focus over social performance. In a professional dev workflow, the most effective acknowledgment is a correct code fix and a technical explanation rather than performative gratitude.

How does Claude handle ambiguous feedback with this skill?

Claude is instructed to stop and ask for clarification on all items before implementing any part of a multi-step request, ensuring that partial understanding doesn't lead to wrong implementations.

Will Claude really push back on my suggestions?

Yes. If a suggestion is technically incorrect, breaks existing functionality, or violates YAGNI (You Ain't Gonna Need It) principles, Claude will provide a reasoned technical explanation instead of blindly following orders.

Receiving Code Review

Name: Receiving Code Review
Author: munlucky

bymunlucky

Collaboration Tools

Enforces technical rigor and verification when processing code review feedback to ensure architectural integrity.

About

The Receiving Code Review skill transforms Claude into a disciplined collaborator that prioritizes technical correctness over social compliance. Instead of 'blind implementation' or performative agreement, this skill mandates a strict protocol: verifying suggestions against the actual codebase, clarifying ambiguous instructions before acting, and providing reasoned pushback against technically unsound or redundant requests. It is ideal for teams that require high-quality code standards and want to avoid 'YAGNI' bloat or accidental regressions during the feedback loop.

Key Features

Anti-Performative Guardrails: Eliminates 'yes-man' responses and social filler to focus on code quality.
Technical Verification Protocol: Checks every suggestion against codebase reality before implementation.
Clarification Workflow: Pauses implementation until all multi-step feedback items are fully understood.
0 GitHub stars
Structured Implementation: Prioritizes fixes by severity, from blocking issues to simple refactors.
Reasoned Pushback: Identifies and disputes technically incorrect, outdated, or redundant suggestions.

Use Cases

Navigating ambiguous feedback by forcing clarification before code changes are made.
Processing complex PR feedback from multiple stakeholders without introducing regressions.
Maintaining architectural consistency by questioning 'over-engineered' or unnecessary feature requests.

About

Key Features

Anti-Performative Guardrails: Eliminates 'yes-man' responses and social filler to focus on code quality.
Technical Verification Protocol: Checks every suggestion against codebase reality before implementation.
Clarification Workflow: Pauses implementation until all multi-step feedback items are fully understood.
0 GitHub stars
Structured Implementation: Prioritizes fixes by severity, from blocking issues to simple refactors.
Reasoned Pushback: Identifies and disputes technically incorrect, outdated, or redundant suggestions.

Use Cases

Navigating ambiguous feedback by forcing clarification before code changes are made.
Processing complex PR feedback from multiple stakeholders without introducing regressions.
Maintaining architectural consistency by questioning 'over-engineered' or unnecessary feature requests.