cshandClaude Opus 4.7
b3df41205d
- Move all third-party skills from codex/skills/ to codex/skills/thirdparty/ - Move .sources/ to codex/skills/thirdparty/.sources/ - Delete systematic-debugging/CREATION-LOG.md (internal dev note, not skill content) - Update sync_thirdparty_skills.sh paths and conflict detection - Update thirdparty_skills.json source_list paths - Update install_skills_action to collect from both own and thirdparty dirs, logging [thirdparty] tag for third-party installs - Update SKILLS.md directory structure docs - Update tests to reflect new paths Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
1.1 KiB
1.1 KiB
Code Quality Reviewer Prompt Template
Use this template when dispatching a code quality reviewer subagent.
Purpose: Verify implementation is well-built (clean, tested, maintainable)
Only dispatch after spec compliance review passes.
Task tool (general-purpose):
Use template at requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md
DESCRIPTION: [task summary, from implementer's report]
PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task N from [plan-file]
BASE_SHA: [commit before task]
HEAD_SHA: [current commit]
In addition to standard code quality concerns, the reviewer should check:
- Does each file have one clear responsibility with a well-defined interface?
- Are units decomposed so they can be understood and tested independently?
- Is the implementation following the file structure from the plan?
- Did this implementation create new files that are already large, or significantly grow existing files? (Don't flag pre-existing file sizes — focus on what this change contributed.)
Code reviewer returns: Strengths, Issues (Critical/Important/Minor), Assessment