Skills Development Ultra-compressed Code Review

Ultra-compressed Code Review

v20260408
caveman-review
Provides ultra-compact, actionable code review comments whenever someone asks for a PR review, enforcing the `location: problem. fix.` format plus optional severity prefixes.
Get Skill
89 downloads
Overview

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

Rules

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

Severity prefix (optional, when mixed):

  • ๐Ÿ”ด bug: โ€” broken behavior, will cause incident
  • ๐ŸŸก risk: โ€” works but fragile (race, missing null check, swallowed error)
  • ๐Ÿ”ต nit: โ€” style, naming, micro-optim. Author can ignore
  • โ“ q: โ€” genuine question, not a suggestion

Drop:

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

โŒ "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."

โœ… L42: ๐Ÿ”ด bug: user can be null after .find(). Add guard before .email.

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

โœ… L88-140: ๐Ÿ”ต nit: 50-line fn does 4 things. Extract validate/normalize/persist.

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

โœ… L23: ๐ŸŸก 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 โ€” 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.

Info
Category Development
Name caveman-review
Version v20260408
Size 2.68KB
Updated At 2026-04-10
Language