mcpField
P
pr-review

pr-review

github.com/proffesor-for-testingTesting & quality520151 installsUpdated today
Repository

About pr-review

A workflow skill for reviewing GitHub pull requests in AQE-focused repositories, covering scope, trust tiers, code quality, and review communication.

Key features

  1. 01Read the complete PR diff and description
  2. 02Exclude platform skills from AQE scope
  3. 03Check trust-tier assignments
  4. 04Review tests, security, and production risks
  5. 05Post actionable review feedback

Use cases

  1. 01Review an AQE-focused pull request
  2. 02Check skill changes and trust tiers
  3. 03Find security or test coverage concerns

Install

Copy the command and run it in a terminal.

$npx skills add https://github.com/proffesor-for-testing/agentic-qe --skill pr-review

After installing, type/pr-reviewin Claude Code to confirm it loaded.

Details

From the project README

PR Review Workflow

Review pull requests with correct AQE scope boundaries, clear communication, and actionable feedback.

Arguments

  • <pr-number> — GitHub PR number to review. If omitted, prompt the user.

Steps

1. Read the Full Diff
gh pr diff <pr-number>
gh pr view <pr-number>

Read the complete diff and PR description. Do not skim — read every changed file.

2. Scope Check
  • Only analyze AQE/QE skills (NOT Claude Flow platform skills)
  • Platform skills to EXCLUDE: v3-, flow-nexus-, agentdb-, reasoningbank-, swarm-, github-, hive-mind-advanced, hooks-automation, iterative-loop, stream-chain, skill-builder, sparc-methodology, pair-programming, release, debug-loop
  • If the PR touches skills, verify the count/scope matches expectations (~82 AQE skills)
  • Flag any platform skill changes that may have leaked into an AQE-focused PR
3. Summarize Changes

Write a user-friendly summary of what changed and why:

  • Focus on outcomes, not implementation details
  • Avoid overly technical jargon
  • Keep it to 3-5 bullet points
4. Trust Tier Validation

For any skill changes, validate trust_tier assignments:

  • tier 3 = has eval infrastructure (evals/, schemas/, scripts/)
  • tier 2 = tested but no eval framework
  • tier 1 = untested
  • Flag inconsistencies (e.g., a skill with evals at tier 2 should be tier 3)
5. Code Quality Review

Check for:

  • Hardcoded version strings
  • Production safety concerns (adapter changes, breaking changes)
  • Missing test coverage for new code
  • Security issues (exposed secrets, injection risks)
6. Post Review
gh pr review <pr-number> --body "review comments"

Communication Rules

  • Keep tone constructive and actionable
  • Be outcome-focused: what should the author do, not what's wrong
  • Group related comments together instead of posting many small ones
  • If approving with minor suggestions, use APPROVE with comments, not REQUEST_CHANGES

Comments

Markdown supported