mcpField
R
review

review

github.com/kevinchamplinSecurity335 installsUpdated 22w ago
Repository

About review

A pre-deployment review skill for examining pending code changes for security vulnerabilities and quality problems. It reports findings with file, line, and severity, without modifying code.

Key features

  1. 01Review staged and unstaged diffs
  2. 02Scan for common security risks
  3. 03Check implementation and error handling
  4. 04Report findings by severity

Use cases

  1. 01Check a change before deployment
  2. 02Find leaked credentials in a diff
  3. 03Review large changes for security issues

Install

Copy the command and run it in a terminal.

$npx skills add https://github.com/kevinchamplin/claude-skills --skill review

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

Details

From the project README

Review — Pre-Deploy Security & Quality Check

Review all pending changes for security vulnerabilities, credential leaks, and quality issues.

Steps

  1. Gather changes:

    • git diff (unstaged) and git diff --staged (staged)
    • If no local changes, diff against the base branch: git diff main...HEAD (or master)

  2. Security scan — check the diff for:

    • Credential leaks: API keys, passwords, tokens, secrets, .env values hardcoded in source
    • SQL injection: raw user input in queries without parameterization
    • XSS: unescaped user input rendered in HTML/JSX
    • Command injection: user input passed to shell commands
    • IDOR: missing authorization checks on endpoints that access resources by ID
    • Debug code: var_dump, console.log with sensitive data, dd(), leftover die() calls
    • .env changes: flag if .env was modified — it should almost never be committed
    • API key exposure: LLM API keys (OpenAI, Anthropic), payment keys (Stripe), auth secrets hardcoded in client-side code
    • Prompt injection: user input concatenated directly into LLM prompts without sanitization
    • SSRF: user-controlled URLs passed to server-side fetch/curl without validation

  3. Quality scan — check for:

    • Incomplete implementations (TODO/FIXME/HACK comments in new code)
    • Error handling gaps (empty catch blocks, swallowed exceptions)
    • Obvious logic errors
    • Files that look accidentally included (.DS_Store, node_modules, compiled assets)

  4. Report:

    • If issues found: list each with file, line, and severity (CRITICAL / WARNING / INFO)
    • If clean: confirm with a one-line "all clear"
    • Keep the report concise — no filler

Rules

  • NEVER modify code during review — only report findings
  • Focus on the diff, not the entire codebase
  • CRITICAL issues = must fix before deploy (credentials, injection, auth bypass)
  • WARNING = should fix (debug code, missing error handling)
  • INFO = nice to fix (style, minor improvements)
  • Delegate to an Explore agent if the diff is very large (50+ files)

Comments

Markdown supported