Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索需要联网github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计提醒

bug-review错误审查

Agent Skill

bug-review 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

总安装

1,947

周安装

78

GitHub Stars

131

下载量

630
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

unknown

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:bug-review(错误审查)
来源仓库:https://github.com/pproenca/dot-skills
仓库路径:skills/bug-review
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/pproenca/dot-skills --skill bug-review
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/pproenca/dot-skills --skill bug-review

简介

bug-review 执行五轮独立代码审查并通过多数投票机制生成高质量评审意见。

  • 适用于 Pull Request 合并前的质量门禁,特别关注 bug 与安全类问题的检出率。
  • 持续学习已解决问题类型以提升未来检出效能,形成闭环优化机制。
  • 可选择自动生成 autofix commit 加速修复周期,但需人工复核关键变更安全性。
  • bug-review 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

SKILL.md

Bug Review v2

Multi-pass PR review agent with 5 parallel review passes, majority voting, independent Opus validation, and resolution rate learning. Posts inline PR comments and optionally generates autofix commits. Tracks whether findings get resolved at merge time and uses that signal to improve future reviews.

When to Apply

  • User asks to review a pull request for bugs or correctness issues
  • User runs /bug-review <PR-number-or-URL>
  • User runs /bug-review:resolve <PR> to classify resolutions after merge
  • User runs /bug-review:report for resolution rate statistics
  • User asks for code review focused on logic errors, edge cases, or security
  • User wants to find bugs in a diff or set of changes

Setup

On first run, verify:

  • gh CLI is installed and authenticated (gh auth status)
  • Current directory is a git repo with a GitHub remote
  • jq is installed (for JSON processing)
  • bc is installed (for resolution rate calculations; pre-installed on most systems)

Read config.json for configuration (passes, vote threshold, models, category weights).

Workflow Overview

/bug-review <PR>
  |
  v
Fetch PR context + gather-context.sh
  |
  v
5 parallel passes (shuffled diffs, Sonnet) --> Aggregate & vote (3/5 majority)
  |
  v
Independent Opus validator --> Dedup --> Present findings --> Post + store
  |
  (later, after merge)
  v
/bug-review:resolve <PR> --> Classify resolutions --> Update category weights

Command: /bug-review

Step 1: Parse Input & Fetch Context

  1. Parse the PR identifier (number, URL, or branch name)
  2. Check cache: Look for ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_DATA}/bug-review/cache/pr-{N}/ — if cache exists for the same head commit, offer to resume from the last checkpoint
  3. Run scripts/fetch-pr.sh <pr-identifier> to get PR diff + metadata as JSON
  4. Save the diff to a temp file for shuffling
  5. Run scripts/gather-context.sh <changed-files-json> to get prioritized context (callers, types, tests, repo rules)
  6. Read .bug-review.md from repo root if it exists
  7. Save checkpoint: Write context to ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_DATA}/bug-review/cache/pr-{N}/context.json

Step 2: Run 5 Parallel Review Passes

For each pass (1-5), prepare a shuffled diff:

scripts/shuffle-diff.sh <pass-number> < pr.diff > pass-<N>.diff

Launch 5 Agent subprocesses in parallel. Read review-passes.md for the exact prompt for each pass.

  • Pass 1: Logic & Edge Cases (seed 1)
  • Pass 2: Security & Data Integrity (seed 2)
  • Pass 3: Error Handling & API Contracts (seed 3)
  • Pass 4: Concurrency & State (seed 4)
  • Pass 5: Data Flow & Contracts (seed 5)

Use model from config.json agent_model (default: "sonnet").

Each agent returns a JSON array of findings.

Save checkpoint: Write all pass results to ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_DATA}/bug-review/cache/pr-{N}/pass-results.json

Step 3: Aggregate & Vote

  1. Collect findings from all 5 passes
  2. Group findings by similarity: same file + line within +/-5 + same or related category
  3. Count votes per group
  4. Keep only findings with 3+ votes (majority of 5, configurable via vote_threshold)
  5. Apply category weights from config.json: final_score = votes × severity_weight × category_weight
  6. Categories with weight < 0.1 are suppressed entirely
  7. Rank by final_score descending

If only 1-2 passes found bugs and the others found none, present findings but note they lack consensus.

Save checkpoint: Write voted findings to cache.

Step 4: Independent Validation (Opus)

Launch a separate Agent using validator_model from config.json (default: "opus").

This agent has NOT seen the review passes. It receives only the voted findings and the original code. Read the Validator section in review-passes.md for the prompt.

For each finding, the validator outputs: {id, verdict: "KEEP"|"DISCARD", confidence, reasoning}

Remove DISCARDed findings. Multiply each finding's score by the validator's confidence.

Compute each finding's final confidence field:

confidence = (votes / total_passes) × validator_confidence

Findings with confidence < 0.5 are shown with a "low confidence" warning.

Save checkpoint: Write validated findings to cache.

Step 5: Dedup Against Prior Reviews

Run scripts/dedup.sh <pr-number> to get existing [bug-review] comments. Match by location proximity (file + line within +/-10) and category — not text similarity.

Step 6: Present Findings to User

Display a table:

#SeverityConfidenceFileLineTitleVotes

For each finding, show full description, trigger scenario, suggested fix, and validator reasoning.

Ask the user (using AskUserQuestion with multiSelect):

  • Which findings to post as PR comments (default: all)
  • Which findings to autofix (default: none)

If no findings survived voting + validation: "No bugs found across 5 review passes. The changes look clean."

Step 7a: Post PR Review

Write approved findings to a temporary JSON file, then run:

scripts/post-review.sh <pr-number> <findings-json-file>

Then persist findings for resolution tracking:

scripts/store-findings.sh <pr-number> <findings-json-file> <head-commit-sha>

Step 7b: Autofix (User-Selected Findings)

For each finding selected for autofix:

  1. Read the file and understand surrounding context
  2. Generate a minimal fix (smallest possible change)
  3. Apply the fix using the Edit tool
  4. Scope check: Run git diff --stat — verify only the finding's file was modified and diff is under 20 lines. If exceeded, revert and warn.
  5. Run existing tests if available (npm test, go test./..., pytest, etc.)
  6. If tests pass: commit with fix: {title} [bug-review]
  7. If tests fail: revert the fix (git checkout -- <file>) and report to user
  8. After all fixes: push to the PR branch

Safety: one commit per fix, run tests between fixes, never force-push, scope-validate every fix.

Command: /bug-review:resolve

Run after a PR is merged to classify whether findings were resolved.

  1. Run scripts/classify-resolutions.sh <pr-number>

- Loads stored findings from ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_DATA}/bug-review/findings/pr-{N}.json - Checks if PR is merged - For each finding: diffs code between review commit and merge commit - Classifies each as RESOLVED, UNRESOLVED, or INCONCLUSIVE - Updates the stored findings file with resolution data

  1. Display resolution summary to user
  2. If enough data accumulated (10+ findings, 3+ PRs): run scripts/update-weights.sh to adjust category weights

Command: /bug-review:report

Display resolution rate statistics across all tracked PRs.

Run scripts/resolution-report.sh which outputs:

  • Overall resolution rate
  • Resolution rate by severity
  • Resolution rate by category (sorted worst-first to highlight noisy categories)
  • Suppressed categories (weight < 0.1)

Repo-Specific Rules (.bug-review.md)

Teams can create .bug-review.md at their repo root:

## Focus Areas
- Pay special attention to authentication flows
- Check all database queries for SQL injection

## Ignore
- Don't flag issues in generated files (*.generated.ts)
- Ignore style-only concerns

## Invariants
- All API endpoints must check req.user before accessing user data
- Database migrations must be reversible

## Severity Overrides
- Treat any auth bypass as CRITICAL regardless of category default

How to Use

Read workflow.md for detailed step-by-step with error handling. Read review-passes.md for all 5 review pass prompts and the validator. Read categories.md for bug categories and learned weights.

Related Skills

  • Consider creating a Runbook skill for investigating bugs found by this review
  • Consider creating a CI/CD skill to run this review automatically on PR open

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Codex

32.79%
按下载量换算207

Claude

29.72%
按下载量换算187

Cursor

18.97%
按下载量换算120

Gemini CLI

10.17%
按下载量换算64

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

可疑

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。来源安全扫描存在 warning/failed 结果,不能写成本站确认安全。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills