본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

shallow-review

Run a quick first review of code changes with six specialist agents working in parallel. They check logic, input and output, shared state, resources, missing behavior, and API completeness, then combine duplicate findings into a report ranked by confidence.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

원문원문 설명 보기

Shallow (quick) ensemble bug-finding review using 6 specialist agents in parallel. Each specialist reviews the same patch through a different lens: Logic & Types, Boundaries & I/O, Concurrency & State, Resources & Serialization, Absence Analysis, and API Completeness. Findings are merged and deduplicated. Best for: quick first-pass review of patches, triage of diffs, broad surface-level bug scan. For deeper file-focused review with full pattern catalogs and codebase investigation, use the deep-review skill instead.

설치 방법 보기

이럴 때 유용합니다

  • Running a quick first review of a patch
  • Screening diffs to prioritize further investigation
  • Checking for missing cleanup and handlers
  • Comparing related code paths for inconsistent changes

포함된 파일(8)

  • SKILL.md11.8 KB
  • EVAL-PROMPT.md4.3 KB
  • references/general/specialists/absence.md5.7 KB
  • references/general/specialists/boundary.md4.9 KB
  • references/general/specialists/completeness.md5.5 KB
  • references/general/specialists/concurrency.md5.7 KB
  • references/general/specialists/logic.md8.0 KB
  • references/general/specialists/resources.md6.3 KB

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

Ensemble Code Review

Six specialist agents review the same patch in parallel. Each applies Phase 0 (understand the change, form hypotheses) then a focused checklist. Their findings are merged and deduplicated.

                    +------------------+
                    |   Input Patch    |
                    +--------+---------+
                             |
    +-------+------+---------+---------+-----------+
    |       |      |         |         |           |
+---v--+ +--v--+ +-v-----+ +-v------+ +v-----+ +---v-------+
|Logic | |Bound| |Concurr| |Resource| |Absenc| | Complete. |
|&Type | | &I/O| |&State | |& Serde | |(2-ph)| | & Contr.  |
+--+---+ +--+--+ +---+---+ +---+----+ +--+---+ +---+-------+
   |        |        |         |          |        |
   +--------+--------+---------+----------+--------+
                               |
                    +----------v----------+
                    |  Pass 3: Symmetry   |
                    |  (serial, optional) |
                    +----------+----------+
                               |
                    +----------v----------+
                    |   Merge & Dedup     |
                    |   (main agent)      |
                    +---------------------+

Quick Start

  1. Identify target — patch, diff, file, or subsystem
  2. Launch 6 specialists in parallel (see prompts below)
  3. Run Pass 3 Symmetry check (serial, after specialists complete)
  4. Merge findings: deduplicate, rank by confidence
  5. Report in unified format

Phase 0: Understand Before Checking

Every specialist runs Phase 0 BEFORE touching the checklist:

  1. Summarize the patch in 2–3 sentences (feature, fix, refactor, move?)
  2. Hypothesize — list 3–5 things that could go wrong with this type of change
  3. Note code shapes that warrant deeper investigation

This switches the review from bottom-up (checklist→code) to top-down (code→hypotheses→verification). The checklist then verifies and extends the hypotheses.


The Six Specialists

1. Logic & Types (52% of bugs)

Priority: wrong comparisons, missing returns, wrong constants, boolean polarity, sentinel ambiguity.

Reference: references/general/specialists/logic.md

Prompt:

You are a LOGIC specialist reviewing a patch for correctness bugs.

PHASE 0 — Understand the patch first (before reading checklist):
Read the patch: `{PATCH_PATH}`
1. Summarize what this patch does in 2-3 sentences.
2. List 3-5 things that could go wrong with this type of change.
3. Note any suspicious code shapes (control flow, comparisons, constants, sentinels).

PHASE 1 — Apply checklist:
Read your checklist: `{SKILL_DIR}/references/general/specialists/logic.md`
Apply questions that match your hypotheses and code shapes. Check all 30 items
against the patch but spend the most effort where your hypotheses pointed.

Report ALL findings above a noise floor. For each: Location, Confidence
(High/Medium/Low), What's wrong (1-2 sentences).
Or "No finding in my domain" if nothing applies.

2. Boundaries & I/O (17% of bugs)

Priority: off-by-one, integer overflow, null/bounds checks, buffer sizing, I/O completeness.

Reference: references/general/specialists/boundary.md

Prompt:

You are a BOUNDARY specialist reviewing a patch for correctness bugs.

PHASE 0 — Understand the patch first (before reading checklist):
Read the patch: `{PATCH_PATH}`
1. Summarize what this patch does in 2-3 sentences.
2. List 3-5 things that could go wrong with this type of change.
3. Note any arithmetic, indexing, range, or I/O operations.

PHASE 1 — Apply checklist:
Read your checklist: `{SKILL_DIR}/references/general/specialists/boundary.md`
Apply questions that match your hypotheses and code shapes. Check all 22 items
against the patch but spend the most effort where your hypotheses pointed.

Report ALL findings above a noise floor. For each: Location, Confidence
(High/Medium/Low), What's wrong (1-2 sentences).
Or "No finding in my domain" if nothing applies.

3. Concurrency & State (16% of bugs)

Priority: races, TOCTOU, live-view iteration, lock ordering, state cleanup.

Reference: references/general/specialists/concurrency.md

Prompt:

You are a CONCURRENCY specialist reviewing a patch for correctness bugs.

PHASE 0 — Understand the patch first (before reading checklist):
Read the patch: `{PATCH_PATH}`
1. Summarize what this patch does in 2-3 sentences.
2. List 3-5 things that could go wrong with this type of change.
3. Note any shared state, locks, collections, lifecycle operations.

PHASE 1 — Apply checklist:
Read your checklist: `{SKILL_DIR}/references/general/specialists/concurrency.md`
Apply questions that match your hypotheses and code shapes. Check all 24 items
against the patch but spend the most effort where your hypotheses pointed.

Report ALL findings above a noise floor. For each: Location, Confidence
(High/Medium/Low), What's wrong (1-2 sentences).
Or "No finding in my domain" if nothing applies.

4. Resources & Serialization (15% of bugs)

Priority: resource leaks, serialization mismatches, wrong metric types, background tasks, wrapper bypass.

Reference: references/general/specialists/resources.md

Prompt:

You are a RESOURCES specialist reviewing a patch for correctness bugs.

PHASE 0 — Understand the patch first (before reading checklist):
Read the patch: `{PATCH_PATH}`
1. Summarize what this patch does in 2-3 sentences.
2. List 3-5 things that could go wrong with this type of change.
3. Note any resource allocation, serialization methods, metrics, streams.

PHASE 1 — Apply checklist:
Read your checklist: `{SKILL_DIR}/references/general/specialists/resources.md`
Apply questions that match your hypotheses and code shapes. Check all 26 items
against the patch but spend the most effort where your hypotheses pointed.

Report ALL findings above a noise floor. For each: Location, Confidence
(High/Medium/Low), What's wrong (1-2 sentences).
Or "No finding in my domain" if nothing applies.

5. Absence Analysis (cross-cutting)

Priority: find what SHOULD be present but ISN'T — missing guards, cleanup, handlers, registrations.

Reference: references/general/specialists/absence.md

Prompt:

You are an ABSENCE specialist. Your job: find bugs that are purely absent — missing
guards, cleanup, handlers, or conditions that leave no signal in the diff.

PHASE 0 — Understand the patch first:
Read the patch: `{PATCH_PATH}`
1. Summarize what this patch does in 2-3 sentences.
2. List 3-5 things that SHOULD be present but might be missing.

PHASE 1 — Build the search list:
Read your checklist: `{SKILL_DIR}/references/general/specialists/absence.md`
For each event in the diff matching items (a)-(q), add to your search list.

PHASE 2 — Execute searches and report:
For each item in your search list:
  - Use Grep and Read tools to gather evidence from the codebase
  - If match found (remove/deregister exists): discard
  - If no match found: report as finding

Report ALL findings above a noise floor. For each: what's missing, where it should
be, what evidence you searched for, Confidence (High/Medium/Low).
Or "No absence finding" if nothing applies.

6. API Completeness & Contracts

Priority: missing fields, missing overrides, registration symmetry, visibility, event coverage.

Reference: references/general/specialists/completeness.md

Prompt:

You are an API COMPLETENESS specialist reviewing a patch for correctness bugs.

PHASE 0 — Understand the patch first (before reading checklist):
Read the patch: `{PATCH_PATH}`
1. Summarize what this patch does in 2-3 sentences.
2. List 3-5 things that could be incomplete about this change.
3. Note any new classes, new fields, new registrations, visibility changes.

PHASE 1 — Apply checklist:
Read your checklist: `{SKILL_DIR}/references/general/specialists/completeness.md`
Apply questions that match your hypotheses and code shapes. Check all 22 items
against the patch but spend the most effort where your hypotheses pointed.

Report ALL findings above a noise floor. For each: Location, Confidence
(High/Medium/Low), What's wrong (1-2 sentences).
Or "No finding in my domain" if nothing applies.

Pass 3: Cross-Path Symmetry (serial, after specialists complete)

Prompt:

You are a SYMMETRY specialist. For each code path modified in this patch, identify
whether a structurally parallel path (same class, interface, event family, version range)
was NOT modified. For each asymmetry:
- Where path A was changed
- Where parallel path B exists
- What was changed on A that is absent on B
- Whether the asymmetry is intentional or suspicious

Read the patch: `{PATCH_PATH}`
Search the codebase as needed using Grep and Read.
Report all asymmetries, Confidence High/Medium/Low.

Merge & Dedup

After all specialists report:

  1. Collect all findings from 6 specialists + symmetry
  2. Deduplicate — same code location + related reasons → combine
  3. Rank by confidence — findings confirmed by multiple specialists rank highest
  4. Cross-check reinforcement:
    • Logic + Absence at same location → boost to High
    • Concurrency + Resources on same lifecycle → boost to High
    • Any finding flagged by 3+ specialists → treat as confirmed
  5. 3-point test each finding:
    • The code construct actually exists in the diff (not inferred)
    • The bug is possible given the visible context (not speculative)
    • The finding is actionable (what specifically should change)
  6. Specialist Silence Rule: If Absence or Completeness reports nothing on a >100-line diff, note: "Consider verifying Phase 2 searches executed for registration symmetry, handler coverage, and field completeness."

Report Format

## Review: [target]

### Findings (ranked by confidence)

#### Finding 1: [title]
- **Location**: [file:line]
- **Confidence**: High / Medium / Low
- **Flagged by**: [specialists]
- **What's wrong**: [1-2 sentences]

### Specialist Coverage
- Logic: [N findings / no finding]
- Boundary: [N findings / no finding]
- Concurrency: [N findings / no finding]
- Resources: [N findings / no finding]
- Absence: [N findings / no finding]
- Completeness: [N findings / no finding]
- Symmetry: [N asymmetries / none]

Statistical Priors

CategoryShareSpecialist
Logic error in condition26%Logic
Wrong constant / default15%Logic
Missing null / bounds check13%Boundary
Incorrect filtering / result11%Logic
Race condition9%Concurrency
Wrong serialization8%Resources
State not cleaned up7%Concurrency
Off-by-one4%Boundary
Resource leak3%Resources

Reference Files

Specialist checklists (trimmed, ensemble mode)

  • references/general/specialists/logic.md — 30 items, Logic specialist
  • references/general/specialists/boundary.md — 22 items, Boundary specialist
  • references/general/specialists/concurrency.md — 24 items, Concurrency specialist
  • references/general/specialists/resources.md — 26 items, Resources specialist
  • references/general/specialists/absence.md — Phase 1/2 search patterns, Absence specialist
  • references/general/specialists/completeness.md — 22 items, Completeness specialist

리뷰

아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.

댓글

로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.

아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.

보내면 바로 공개됩니다. 이메일 주소나 전화번호 같은 개인 정보는 쓰지 마세요. URL은 2개까지입니다.

0 / 1,000자

이 양식은 reCAPTCHA로 보호되며 Google 개인정보처리방침 및 서비스 약관이 적용됩니다.

같은 저장소의 스킬

Analyze bug-fix commits in a Git repository to uncover recurring failure patterns. Produce individual bug analyses and a reusable pattern guide that removes project-specific details, helping inform future code reviews.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Extract recurring bug patterns from past fixes
  • Build a reusable guide for code reviews
  • Analyze fixes within a chosen date range or path
apache/cassandra1만2026년 10월 17일 업데이트

Write Apache Cassandra distributed tests that simulate multiple nodes within one JVM, the Java runtime. The guide covers cluster setup, queries, node restarts, message dropping for failure scenarios, and troubleshooting problems caused by isolated class loading.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Writing read and write tests across multiple nodes
  • Testing timeouts by dropping messages between nodes
  • Verifying node replacement and restarts
apache/cassandra1만2026년 10월 17일 업데이트

Review selected files for bugs by reading full source code, callers, and related implementations. Apply detailed checklists and investigate suspected issues, then report evidence, confidence levels, and suggested fixes.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Review selected files in a critical code change
  • Investigate concerns raised by an initial review
  • Check complex state transitions and object lifecycles
apache/cassandra1만2026년 10월 17일 업데이트

heatmap

무료

Analyze Git history to find frequently and recently changed files and lines, then rank review targets. Use the results to focus pull request reviews, bug investigations, or security audits on specific code regions and risks.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Prioritizing files during pull request reviews
  • Finding starting points for bug investigations
  • Narrowing security audits to frequently changed code
apache/cassandra1만2026년 10월 17일 업데이트

Review changes of 1,000 lines or more by dividing work across files, focused areas, and commits. Combine several review methods, check consistency across subsystems, verify bug fixes, and report validated findings alongside a checklist showing review coverage.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Reviewing feature branches with 1,000 or more changed lines
  • Checking a large change before merging
  • Finding inconsistencies across commits and subsystems
apache/cassandra1만2026년 10월 17일 업데이트

Explain code structure and behavior with text diagrams, including before-and-after views of changes. Trace data flow and state changes, clarify design choices, and examine assumptions, possible failures, and interactions between tasks running at the same time.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Understanding a patch through before-and-after diagrams
  • Tracing a class's behavior and state changes
  • Mapping component relationships across a codebase
apache/cassandra1만2026년 10월 17일 업데이트

apache의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고