ork-review-pr

Solid

Review a pull request or branch for correctness, regressions, security, operational risk, and missing evidence. Use when a request asks to review a PR, review a diff, find real bugs, assess merge risk, or provide evidence-backed review findings. Do not use for implementation or style-only cleanup.

Code & Development 229 stars 25 forks Updated today MIT

Install

View on GitHub

Quality Score: 81/100

Stars 20%
79
Recency 20%
100
Frontmatter 20%
70
Documentation 15%
56
Issue Health 10%
50
License 10%
100
Description 5%
100

Skill Content

# Ork Review PR Stay read-only and review the actual diff in its repository context. Read the applicable instructions, trace changed behavior to its callers and tests, and prioritize correctness, security, data loss, race conditions, backwards compatibility, and evidence gaps over style. Verify third-party API and configuration claims against the context7 MCP server (`resolve-library-id`, then `query-docs`) before reporting or dismissing a finding that turns on library behavior. A wrong recalled signature is how a review invents a bug and how it misses one. Use one reviewer for a focused diff. For a broad or high-risk PR, fan out independent read-only passes for code-path mapping, risk review, and documentation/API verification; each must return file and line evidence. Prefer `ork_reviewer` when installed, otherwise use a fresh built-in explorer/reviewer role. Lead with findings ordered by severity. Every finding needs a concrete location, impact, and a reproduction or reasoning path. If there are no findings, say what was checked and what was not. Do not modify files or approve/merge the PR.

Details

Author
yonatangross
Repository
yonatangross/orchestkit
Created
8 months ago
Last Updated
today
Language
TypeScript
License
MIT

Integrates with

Similar Skills

Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category