review▌

Comprehensive guide for evaluating iOS, macOS, tvOS, watchOS, and visionOS app code against Apple's App Store Review Guidelines. This skill covers EVERY guideline point to identify potential rejection issues before submission.

Review requirements or plan documents through multi-persona analysis. Dispatches specialized reviewer agents in parallel, auto-fixes quality issues, and presents strategic questions for user decision.

Technical rigor in code review: receiving feedback critically, requesting systematic reviews, and verifying before any completion claims. \n \n Three core practices: receiving feedback with technical evaluation over performative agreement, requesting reviews via code-reviewer subagent, and verification gates requiring evidence before status claims \n Includes decision tree and protocols for handling feedback from human partners versus external reviewers, with explicit rules against performative

Comprehensive App Store review preparation guide covering rejections, privacy manifests, IAP rules, and compliance checklists. \n \n Covers top rejection reasons (incomplete apps, inaccurate metadata, private API usage) with prevention strategies and real examples of approved vs. rejected content \n Detailed privacy manifest requirements with reason codes, ATT implementation patterns, and cross-reference checks between nutrition labels and actual data collection \n In-App Purchase and StoreKit r

Systematic checklist for reviewing code across functionality, security, performance, and maintainability. \n \n Covers six review areas: context understanding, functionality verification, code quality assessment, security checks, performance analysis, and test coverage validation \n Includes concrete examples of common issues (SQL injection, missing validation, unclear naming) paired with corrected versions \n Provides pre-review, per-section, and git-specific checklists to ensure nothing is mis

Expert code review of current git changes with a senior engineer lens. \n \n Detects SOLID violations (SRP, OCP, LSP, ISP, DIP), architecture smells, and proposes incremental refactors with clear rationale \n Scans for security risks including injection, XSS, AuthZ gaps, race conditions, and unsafe deserialization with exploitability assessment \n Identifies removal candidates and unused code with safe deletion vs. deferred plans and concrete follow-up checkpoints \n Flags code quality issues: e

Identify and review overdue Google Tasks requiring immediate attention. \n \n Requires the gws-tasks skill to query Google Tasks API \n Three-step workflow: list all task lists, filter incomplete tasks by list ID, and review due dates for prioritization \n Returns task data in table format for easy scanning of overdue items \n

Structured code review framework covering quality, security, performance, and testing standards. \n \n Provides eight-step review methodology: context understanding, high-level architecture assessment, detailed code inspection, security audit, performance analysis, testing validation, documentation check, and constructive feedback delivery \n Covers SOLID principles, naming conventions, error handling, input validation, authentication/authorization, SQL injection and XSS prevention, and resource

Peer review is a systematic process for evaluating scientific manuscripts. Assess methodology, statistics, design, reproducibility, ethics, and reporting standards. Apply this skill for manuscript and grant review across disciplines with constructive, rigorous evaluation.

Comprehensive C#/.NET design pattern analysis with actionable improvement recommendations. \n \n Evaluates six core patterns: Command, Factory, Dependency Injection, Repository, Provider, and Resource patterns against GoF and SOLID principles \n Analyzes architecture compliance including namespace conventions, project separation, async/await patterns, and structured logging implementation \n Reviews code quality across security, testability, maintainability, and performance dimensions with speci