How does it handle unclear or ambiguous feedback?

The skill instructs the AI to stop implementation immediately and ask for specific clarification before proceeding with any part of the requested changes.

Can the AI push back on a suggestion it disagrees with?

Yes. If a suggestion is technically incorrect, breaks functionality, or violates project-specific rules like YAGNI, the AI provides a reasoned technical pushback instead of blind compliance.

Why does this skill forbid saying 'Thanks' or 'Great point'?

This skill prioritizes technical actions over social performance to ensure the AI remains objective and avoids sycophancy, which can lead to implementing incorrect feedback just to please the reviewer.

What is the 'YAGNI' check in this context?

The AI greps the codebase to verify if a suggested 'proper' feature is actually needed for current usage, preventing the addition of unused code or over-engineered solutions.

Technical Code Review Handler

Name: Technical Code Review Handler
Author: cipherstash

bycipherstash

•

Collaboration Tools

Manages code review feedback with technical rigor, prioritizing verification and correctness over performative agreement or blind implementation.

About

This skill equips Claude with a structured framework for processing code review feedback from both human partners and external reviewers. It emphasizes technical evaluation and codebase verification before any implementation begins, explicitly forbidding performative social responses like 'Great point!' or 'You're absolutely right.' By requiring Claude to restate requirements in its own words, ask for clarification on ambiguous items, and push back against technically unsound suggestions or unnecessary feature creep, it ensures the codebase remains lean, functional, and aligned with actual project needs.

Key Features

Structured response pattern for systematic feedback evaluation
Strict elimination of performative or sycophantic social responses
Mandatory verification against the codebase reality before execution
Heuristics for identifying and pushing back on YAGNI violations
Specific protocols for handling ambiguous or multi-part feedback requests
4 GitHub stars

Use Cases

Evaluating and implementing feedback from external pull request reviewers
Clarifying vague instructions from human collaborators to prevent wrong implementations
Defending architectural decisions against unnecessary feature requests

About

Key Features

Structured response pattern for systematic feedback evaluation
Strict elimination of performative or sycophantic social responses
Mandatory verification against the codebase reality before execution
Heuristics for identifying and pushing back on YAGNI violations
Specific protocols for handling ambiguous or multi-part feedback requests
4 GitHub stars

Use Cases

Evaluating and implementing feedback from external pull request reviewers
Clarifying vague instructions from human collaborators to prevent wrong implementations
Defending architectural decisions against unnecessary feature requests