caveman-review▌
JuliusBrussee/caveman · updated Apr 18, 2026
### Caveman Code Review
- ›Delivers ultra-compressed, actionable PR feedback using a strict L<line>: <problem>. <fix>. format to eliminate noise.
- ›Uses severity prefixes like 🔴 bug, 🟡 risk, 🔵 nit, and ❓ q to categorize findings without unnecessary conversational filler.
- ›Switches to verbose explanations only for critical security issues, architectural debates, or onboarding contexts.
Write code review comments terse and actionable. One line per finding. Location, problem, fix. No throat-clearing.
Rules
Format: L<line>: <problem>. <fix>. — or <file>:L<line>: ... when reviewing multi-file diffs.
Severity prefix (optional, when mixed):
🔴 bug:— broken behavior, will cause incident🟡 risk:— works but fragile (race, missing null check, swallowed error)🔵 nit:— style, naming, micro-optim. Author can ignore❓ q:— genuine question, not a suggestion
Drop:
- "I noticed that...", "It seems like...", "You might want to consider..."
- "This is just a suggestion but..." — use
nit:instead - "Great work!", "Looks good overall but..." — say it once at the top, not per comment
- Restating what the line does — the reviewer can read the diff
- Hedging ("perhaps", "maybe", "I think") — 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
❌ "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."
✅ L42: 🔴 bug: user can be null after .find(). Add guard before .email.
❌ "It looks like this function is doing a lot of things and might benefit from being broken up into smaller functions for readability."
✅ L88-140: 🔵 nit: 50-line fn does 4 things. Extract validate/normalize/persist.
❌ "Have you considered what happens if the API returns a 429? I think we should probably handle that case."
✅ L23: 🟡 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 — 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.
Ratings
4.6★★★★★37 reviews- ★★★★★Diego Ndlovu· Dec 24, 2024
I recommend caveman-review for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
- ★★★★★Dev Perez· Dec 8, 2024
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: caveman-review is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
- ★★★★★Diya Dixit· Nov 27, 2024
We added caveman-review from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Jin Desai· Nov 15, 2024
Keeps context tight: caveman-review is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- ★★★★★Jin Khanna· Oct 18, 2024
caveman-review fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- ★★★★★Min Okafor· Oct 6, 2024
caveman-review is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- ★★★★★Sakura Brown· Sep 13, 2024
Keeps context tight: caveman-review is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- ★★★★★Yash Thakker· Sep 9, 2024
I recommend caveman-review for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
- ★★★★★Dhruvi Jain· Aug 28, 2024
Useful defaults in caveman-review — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
- ★★★★★Li Anderson· Aug 4, 2024
caveman-review is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
showing 1-10 of 37