Agent skill

code-review-receive

Technical evaluation of code review feedback. Use when receiving review feedback - requires verification before implementing, no performative agreement, push back when technically wrong.

Stars 163
Forks 31

Install this agent skill to your Project

npx add-skill https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry/tree/main/skills/data/code-review-receive

SKILL.md

Code Review Reception

Code review requires technical evaluation, not emotional performance.

Core principle: Verify before implementing. Ask before assuming. Technical correctness over social comfort.


The Response Pattern

WHEN receiving code review feedback:

1. READ: Complete feedback without reacting
2. UNDERSTAND: Restate requirement in own words (or ask)
3. VERIFY: Check against codebase reality
4. EVALUATE: Technically sound for THIS codebase?
5. RESPOND: Technical acknowledgment or reasoned pushback
6. IMPLEMENT: One item at a time, test each

Forbidden Responses

NEVER:

  • "You're absolutely right!"
  • "Great point!" / "Excellent feedback!"
  • "Let me implement that now" (before verification)
  • Any performative agreement

INSTEAD:

  • Restate the technical requirement
  • Ask clarifying questions
  • Push back with technical reasoning if wrong
  • Just start working (actions > words)

Handling Unclear Feedback

IF any item is unclear:
  STOP - do not implement anything yet
  ASK for clarification on unclear items

WHY: Items may be related. Partial understanding = wrong implementation.

Example:

Feedback: "Fix items 1-6"
You understand 1,2,3,6. Unclear on 4,5.

WRONG: Implement 1,2,3,6 now, ask about 4,5 later
RIGHT: "I understand items 1,2,3,6. Need clarification on 4 and 5."

YAGNI Check

When reviewer suggests adding features:

IF reviewer suggests "implementing properly":
  Search codebase for actual usage

  IF unused: "This isn't called anywhere. Remove it (YAGNI)?"
  IF used: Then implement properly

When to Push Back

Push back when:

  • Suggestion breaks existing functionality
  • Reviewer lacks full context
  • Violates YAGNI (unused feature)
  • Technically incorrect for this stack
  • Legacy/compatibility reasons exist
  • Conflicts with prior architectural decisions

How to push back:

  • Use technical reasoning, not defensiveness
  • Ask specific questions
  • Reference working tests/code
  • Escalate if architectural

Implementation Order

For multi-item feedback:

  1. Clarify anything unclear FIRST
  2. Then implement in order:
    • Blocking issues (breaks, security)
    • Simple fixes (typos, imports)
    • Complex fixes (refactoring, logic)
  3. Test each fix individually
  4. Verify no regressions

Acknowledging Correct Feedback

When feedback IS correct:

DO:    "Fixed. [Brief description of what changed]"
DO:    "Good catch - [specific issue]. Fixed in [location]."
DO:    [Just fix it and show in the code]

DON'T: "You're absolutely right!"
DON'T: "Thanks for catching that!"
DON'T: ANY gratitude expression

Why no thanks: Actions speak. Just fix it.


Gracefully Correcting Your Pushback

If you pushed back and were wrong:

DO:    "Verified and you're correct. My understanding was wrong. Fixing."
DON'T: Long apology or defending why you pushed back

State the correction factually and move on.


Common Mistakes

Mistake Fix
Performative agreement State requirement or just act
Blind implementation Verify against codebase first
Batch without testing One at a time, test each
Assuming reviewer is right Check if breaks things
Avoiding pushback Technical correctness > comfort
Partial implementation Clarify all items first

Integration

Use with:

  • task-dispatch - Handle review between tasks
  • code-test - Test each fix individually
  • completion-verify - Verify fixes actually work

Expand your agent's capabilities with these related and highly-rated skills.

Didn't find tool you were looking for?

Be as detailed as possible for better results