Works with the AI tools you already use

    Claude CodeClaude CodeCursorCursorCodex CLICodex CLIGitHub CopilotGitHub CopilotGemini CLIGemini CLI+20 more

    PR Review Gatekeeper

    1

    Turn your agent into a senior code reviewer that blocks risky merges, ranks findings by real impact, and gives authors fixes they can apply in one pass.

    Free

    0 installsSecurity scanned
    PR Review Gatekeeper

    PR Review Gatekeeper

    Example session with this skill installed

    Review PR #482 in our billing-api repo before it merges. The author claims the new Redis caching layer around invoice validation is safe and drops p95 latency, but CI only ran the happy path. Check the diff against src/billing/validators, the existing cache helpers in src/lib/cache, and docs/caching.md. I care most about whether validation can be skipped on cache hits, whether the new displayMode config option breaks persistence compatibility, and whether the tests would catch a regression. Give me findings sorted by severity with exact change requests, not vague opinions.

    • Read your context and instructions
    • Compiled the pr review gatekeeper

    Summary

    Reviewed PR #482 (cached invoice validation, 11 files, +540/-72). The bug is real and the intent fits the roadmap, but the warm-cache path still skips validation and the new retry logic ships without failure tests. Verdict: request changes.

    AreaBeforeAfter
    Blocking issuesnone claimedcache-hit writes bypass validateRecord()
    Test coveragehappy path only3 new cases: timeout, success-after-retry, exhausted retries
    API claritydisplayMode also changes persistencerename it or split display/storage flags
    Docsdocs/caching.md untouchedinvalidation note added

    Next steps

    • Route warm-cache writes through the same validation path and add a regression test for the warm-cache write.
    • Add the three retry tests above; assert on outcomes, not implementation internals.
    • Rename displayMode so the name reflects both effects, or split into two settings.
    • Include a migration note for the return-type change, or update all known call sites in this PR.
    • Everything else (naming, guard-clause ordering) batched as optional; not blocking.

    Connects securely to your tools. The creator never sees your data.

    About this skill

    Stop merging risky code and low-quality patches. This skill transforms your agent into a disciplined senior code reviewer that prioritizes repository health over contributor convenience. It moves beyond superficial linting to identify architectural mismatches, security vulnerabilities, and hidden maintenance costs.

    What it does

    • Risk Assessment Categorizes findings into Blocking, Major, Minor, and Optional to focus on what matters.
    • Intent Validation Cross-references the diff against PR descriptions, linked issues, and commit messages to ensure the solution matches the problem.
    • API Quality Control Evaluates public interfaces for naming clarity, predictable defaults, and backward compatibility.
    • Maintenance Analysis Identifies fragile logic, premature abstractions, and hidden coupling that increase long-term technical debt.
    • Verification Strategy Demands meaningful tests for failure paths and edge cases, not just happy-path coverage.

    How it works

    1. Context Gathering The agent inspects the PR description, related tickets, and surrounding files before reading the diff.
    2. Impact Analysis It evaluates correctness, design fit, performance, and operational costs.
    3. Structured Feedback The agent generates specific, actionable comments that explain what was observed, why it matters, and how to fix it.
    4. Decision Logic It applies a rigorous checklist to provide a clear verdict: Approve, Request Changes, or Reject with guidance.

    Frameworks & tools

    Works with any programming language or framework. Integrates with Git-based workflows, gh CLI, and standard testing suites like pytest, jest, or go test.

    Why this beats prompting it yourself

    Most prompts result in "LGTM" or pedantic style nits. This skill enforces a skeptical, senior-level posture that catches architectural regressions and security flaws that generic prompts miss.

    Use cases

    • Preventing breaking changes in shared library APIs.
    • Auditing security-sensitive paths in web backend services.
    • Ensuring consistent design patterns across a growing microservices mono-repo.
    • Mentoring junior developers with specific, educational feedback on complex logic.

    Known limitations

    Cannot execute code in sandboxed environments without external tool access. Performance analysis is based on static inspection, not dynamic profiling.

    How to install

    Works the same in every agent - Claude, Cursor, Codex, Copilot and 20+ more.

    ~30 seconds
    1. 1

      Download the ZIP

      Free skills download straight away. Paid skills unlock right after purchase.

    2. 2

      Unzip into your skills folder

      Every agent reads skills from one folder on your machine. Drop the unzipped folder in there.

    3. 3

      Ask your agent to use it

      Restart the agent if it was already running. It picks the skill up automatically - no config needed.

    Skills folder by agent

    Click the path to copy it. Create the folder if it does not exist yet.

    Reviews

    No reviews yet

    Be one of the first to try it. Every listed skill passes our trust checks below.

    Security scanned

    Passed our 8-point scan before listing

    Fresh listing

    Recently published to Agensi

    Free forever

    No account required to browse

    Trust & safety

    Security scanned

    Verified clean 6 days ago

    • Free to download with an account

    Listed6 days ago

    What's inside

    Frequently Asked Questions