review-pr 100/100 — SaferSkills

Is review-pr safe to install?

SaferSkills independently audited review-pr (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.

CategoryWeightCategory scoreContribution

Securityprompt, exec, net, exfil, eval

35%

100

35.0 pts

Supply chainhash, typosquat, maintainer, lockfile

20%

100

20.0 pts

Maintenancestaleness, pinning, CI

15%

100

15.0 pts

TransparencySKILL.md, perms, README

15%

100

15.0 pts

Communityinstalls, verify, response

15%

100

15.0 pts

Findings & checks · 0 flagged

Securityscore 100 · 0 findings

✓—All security checks passedNo findings in this category for the latest scan.pass

Supply chainscore 100 · 0 findings

✓—All supply chain checks passedNo findings in this category for the latest scan.pass

Maintenancescore 100 · 0 findings

✓—All maintenance checks passedNo findings in this category for the latest scan.pass

Transparencyscore 100 · 0 findings

✓—All transparency checks passedNo findings in this category for the latest scan.pass

Communityscore 100 · 0 findings

✓—All community checks passedNo findings in this category for the latest scan.pass

The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.

skills/review-pr/SKILL.md · 1 file

skills/review-pr/SKILL.md1.8 KB · Markdown

name: review-pr

description: "Review a pull request with structured severity-based feedback. Use when asked to review a PR, code review, or given a PR number/URL."

Review the pull request: $ARGUMENTS

Follow this process:

why-not-mechanizable: review workflow guidance; each step requires reading the PR and judging code quality / intent.

Fetch PR details: run gh pr view $ARGUMENTS --json title,body,files,commits,additions,deletions,baseRefName,headRefName (review-time: see section note)
Read the diff: run gh pr diff $ARGUMENTS to see all changes (review-time: see section note)
Understand intent: read the PR description, linked issues, and commit messages before reviewing code (review-time: see section note)
Load relevant agents: based on the files changed, load the appropriate expert agents from ~/.claude/agents/ for domain-specific review (review-time: see section note)
Review systematically using the checklist in @checklist.md (review-time: see section note)
Produce structured output in this format: (review-time: see section note)

## Summary

<1-2 sentence overall assessment>

## Verdict: APPROVE / REQUEST_CHANGES / NEEDS_DISCUSSION

<reason>

## Findings

### BLOCKER (must fix before merge)

- **[file:line]** - Description. Why it matters. Suggested fix.

### ISSUE (should fix, may approve with commitment to follow-up)

- **[file:line]** - Description. Recommendation.

### SUGGESTION (take it or leave it)

- **[file:line]** - Description. Alternative approach.

### NIT (style/preference, non-blocking)

- **[file:line]** - Description.

### PRAISE (good patterns worth highlighting)

- **[file:line]** - What's done well and why.

If no $ARGUMENTS provided, review changes in the current branch against the base branch using git diff main...HEAD.

review-pr— agent skill

Is review-pr safe to install?

Audit the pieces. Scan the whole. Decide.