pr-review▌
minimax-ai/skills · updated Apr 8, 2026
Review pull requests against repository standards. Two-phase process: automated validation, then manual content review.
PR Review Skill
Review pull requests against repository standards. Two-phase process: automated validation, then manual content review.
Phase 1: Automated Validation (Hard Rules)
Run the validation script to check structural requirements:
python .claude/skills/pr-review/scripts/validate_skills.py
The script checks:
SKILL.mdexists in every skill directory- YAML frontmatter is parseable
- Required fields present:
name,description namematches directory name- No hardcoded secrets detected
All ERROR-level checks must pass. WARNING-level items (missing license, metadata) should be flagged but are not blockers.
See references/structure-rules.md for the complete hard rules specification.
Phase 2: Content Review (Soft Guidelines)
After automated checks pass, review the PR against quality guidelines:
- Skill scope — Does it overlap with existing skills? Is the boundary clear?
- Description quality — Does the
descriptioninclude clear trigger conditions? - File size — Are reference docs reasonably sized for context window consumption?
- API key handling — If external APIs are used, are credentials read from environment variables?
- Script quality — Do scripts have shebang, requirements.txt, and error handling?
- Language — Are SKILL.md and code written in English?
- README sync — Are
README.mdandREADME_zh.mdupdated for new skills?
See references/quality-guidelines.md for soft guidelines details.
Review Checklist Summary
Must Pass (Blockers)
-
validate_skills.pyexits with code 0 - PR title follows conventional commit format
- One PR, one purpose
Should Pass (Flagged in Review)
- No functional overlap with existing skills
- Description includes trigger conditions
- Files are reasonably sized
- API keys via environment variables
- README tables updated for new skills (Source column set to
Community)
Discussion
Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)- No comments yet — start the thread.
Ratings
4.8★★★★★36 reviews- ★★★★★Shikha Mishra· Dec 28, 2024
Useful defaults in pr-review — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
- ★★★★★Yuki Taylor· Dec 24, 2024
pr-review fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- ★★★★★Nikhil Mensah· Dec 4, 2024
pr-review has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Yash Thakker· Nov 19, 2024
pr-review has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Sakshi Patil· Nov 15, 2024
Registry listing for pr-review matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- ★★★★★Luis Agarwal· Nov 15, 2024
pr-review is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- ★★★★★Valentina Ghosh· Nov 7, 2024
pr-review reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Mateo Torres· Oct 26, 2024
Registry listing for pr-review matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- ★★★★★Dhruvi Jain· Oct 10, 2024
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: pr-review is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
- ★★★★★Chaitanya Patil· Oct 6, 2024
pr-review reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
showing 1-10 of 36