Caveman Review

作者 juliusbrussee2e08b9177c07无许可证110K 个星标收录于 2026年10月8日更新于 2026年10月8日仓库今天更新

Compressed code review - one line per finding with location, problem and fix. Use for /caveman-review, "review this PR", or "review the diff".

AI 生成的概览

将代码审查发现整理为简洁的单行评论,包含位置、问题和修复建议。

功能
提供一种压缩式的代码审查评论写法,每条发现一行,按位置、问题、修复的形式呈现。它定义了可选的严重级别前缀,用于缺陷、风险、小问题和提问,列出了应删除的措辞和应保留的细节,并给出前后对比示例。它还说明了何时应放弃简洁模式,例如安全问题、架构分歧和新成员上手场景。
适用场景
适用于审查拉取请求或差异,并希望得到可直接粘贴的简短可执行评论时。适合希望避免含糊措辞和复述代码的审查者。它不用于编写修复代码、批准变更或运行代码检查工具。
运行要求
无需工具、软件包或凭据;仅为说明性内容,不附带脚本。

Write code review comments terse and actionable. One line per finding. Location, problem, fix. No throat-clearing.

Rules

Format: L<line>: <problem>. <fix>. — or <file>:L<line>: ... when reviewing multi-file diffs.

Severity prefix (optional, when mixed):

  • 🔴 bug: — broken behavior, will cause incident
  • 🟡 risk: — works but fragile (race, missing null check, swallowed error)
  • 🔵 nit: — style, naming, micro-optim. Author can ignore
  • ❓ q: — genuine question, not a suggestion

Drop:

  • "I noticed that...", "It seems like...", "You might want to consider..."
  • "This is just a suggestion but..." — use nit: instead
  • "Great work!", "Looks good overall but..." — say it once at the top, not per comment
  • Restating what the line does — the reviewer can read the diff
  • Hedging ("perhaps", "maybe", "I think") — if unsure use q:

Keep:

  • Exact line numbers
  • Exact symbol/function/variable names in backticks
  • Concrete fix, not "consider refactoring this"
  • The why if the fix isn't obvious from the problem statement

Examples

❌ "I noticed that on line 42 you're not checking if the user object is null before accessing the email property. This could potentially cause a crash if the user is not found in the database. You might want to add a null check here."

✅ L42: 🔴 bug: user can be null after .find(). Add guard before .email.

❌ "It looks like this function is doing a lot of things and might benefit from being broken up into smaller functions for readability."

✅ L88-140: 🔵 nit: 50-line fn does 4 things. Extract validate/normalize/persist.

❌ "Have you considered what happens if the API returns a 429? I think we should probably handle that case."

✅ L23: 🟡 risk: no retry on 429. Wrap in withBackoff(3).

Auto-Clarity

Drop terse mode for: security findings (CVE-class bugs need full explanation + reference), architectural disagreements (need rationale, not just a one-liner), and onboarding contexts where the author is new and needs the "why". In those cases write a normal paragraph, then resume terse for the rest.

Boundaries

Reviews only — does not write the code fix, does not approve/request-changes, does not run linters. Output the comment(s) ready to paste into the PR. "stop caveman-review" or "normal mode": revert to verbose review style.

来源与署名

来源:juliusbrussee/caveman位于skills/caveman-review提交2e08b91

许可证: 无许可证

内容归原作者所有。SourceWeft 从公开仓库中收录这些内容。

举报或申请下架