Caveman Review

作者 juliusbrussee2e08b9177c07無授權條款110K 個星標收錄於 2026年10月8日更新於 2026年10月8日儲存庫今天更新

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

AI 產生的概覽

把程式碼審查發現整理成精簡的單行評論,包含位置、問題與修正建議。

功能
提供一種壓縮式的程式碼審查評論寫法,每項發現一行,依位置、問題、修正的形式呈現。它定義了可選的嚴重性前綴,用於缺陷、風險、小問題與提問,列出應刪除的措辭與應保留的細節,並提供前後對照範例。它也說明何時應放棄精簡模式,例如安全性問題、架構歧異與新成員上手情境。
適用情境
適用於審查拉取請求或差異,並希望取得可直接貼上的簡短可行評論時。適合想避免含糊措辭與複述程式碼的審查者。它不用於撰寫修正程式碼、核准變更或執行程式碼檢查工具。
執行需求
不需要工具、套件或憑證;僅為說明性內容,不附帶指令碼。

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.

來源與署名

來源:juliusbrussee/caveman位於skills/caveman-review提交2e08b91

授權條款: 無授權條款

內容歸原作者所有。SourceWeft 從公開儲存庫中收錄這些內容。

檢舉或申請下架