Best for
- Perform a full code review / audit of the codebase
- Proactively find security vulnerabilities, logic bugs, or code quality problems
- Turn code review findings into tracked GitHub issues
TencentCloudBase/CloudBase-AI-Toolkit/skills/codebase-audit/SKILL.md
Perform a full codebase review, categorize findings by severity, file GitHub issues, then fix each issue in an isolated git worktree and submit PRs. Use this skill when the user asks to audit the codebase, do a comprehensive code review, find and fix security/quality/reliability issues, or run a proactive health check across the entire repository.
Decision brief
End-to-end workflow: systematically review the entire codebase, report findings as GitHub issues, fix each issue in an isolated git worktree, and submit PRs — all in one session.
Compatibility matrix
| Platform | Status | Evidence | What to check |
|---|---|---|---|
| Codex | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Claude Code | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Cursor | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Gemini CLI | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
Installation
The source command is displayed only when detected. A safe inspection prompt is always available so your agent can explain every action before execution.
npx skills add https://github.com/TencentCloudBase/CloudBase-AI-Toolkit --skill "skills/codebase-audit"Inspect the Agent Skill "codebase-audit" from https://github.com/TencentCloudBase/CloudBase-AI-Toolkit/blob/1dddc898085c55ae616c3b0bf989b4b7b7797b35/skills/codebase-audit/SKILL.md at commit 1dddc898085c55ae616c3b0bf989b4b7b7797b35. List every install step, command, network request, credential, file read/write, external action, and rollback step. Explain whether it fits my task. Do not install or execute anything until I approve.
Workflow
1. Read references/review-strategy.md for the review scope and checklist. 2. Use the code-explorer subagent to read ALL source files in the target directory (default: mcp/src/). 3. For each file, systematically check against the review checklist: - Security: path traversal, inje…
1. Read references/review-strategy.md for the review scope and checklist. 2. Use the code-explorer subagent to read ALL source files in the target directory (default: mcp/src/). 3. For each file, systematically check against the review checklist: - Security: path traversal, inje…
1. Read references/classification.md for severity definitions and grouping rules. 2. Deduplicate findings — merge instances of the same pattern across files. 3. Group findings into fix batches — related issues that should be fixed together in one PR. 4. Assign severity and prior…
1. Read references/issue-workflow.md for issue creation guidelines. 2. For each fix batch (or individual Critical finding), create a GitHub issue:
1. Read references/worktree-fix.md for the isolation and fix procedure. 2. For each issue (in priority order): a. Create an isolated worktree and branch:
Permission review
The documentation asks the agent to read local files, directories, or repositories.
Use the `code-explorer` subagent to read ALL source files in the target directory (default: `mcp/src/`).The documentation asks the agent to run terminal commands or scripts.
git worktree add ../<repo>-audit-fix-<issue-number> -b fix/<slug>-<issue-number> origin/mainThe documentation asks the agent to run terminal commands or scripts.
git commit -m 'fix(<scope>): 🔒 <english description>The documentation asks the agent to create, modify, or delete local files.
git worktree remove ../<repo>-audit-fix-<issue-number>Evidence record
| Signal | Value | Evidence type | Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quality score | 86/100 | Computed | Documentation, specificity, maintenance, and trust rules |
| Repository stars | 1,066 | Source | Repository attention, not individual Skill quality |
| Compatibility | 0 platforms | Source | Declared in the catalog source record |
| Usage guide | automated source guide | Editorial | Generated or reviewed according to the visible evidence level |
Pinned source
End-to-end workflow: systematically review the entire codebase, report findings as GitHub issues, fix each issue in an isolated git worktree, and submit PRs — all in one session.
Use this skill when you need to:
Do NOT use for:
systematic-debugging or direct fix)pr-review-fix)mcp-attribution-worktree)references/review-strategy.md for the review scope and checklist.code-explorer subagent to read ALL source files in the target directory (default: mcp/src/).as any, unsafe casts, missing null checksreferences/dependency-audit.md and run the Dependabot alert fetch + npm audit to discover vulnerable dependencies. Record each finding using the dependency-audit format.references/classification.md for severity definitions and grouping rules.references/issue-workflow.md for issue creation guidelines.gh issue create --title "<type>(<scope>): <summary>" --body "<structured body>" --label "<severity>,<category>"
references/worktree-fix.md for the isolation and fix procedure.git worktree add ../<repo>-audit-fix-<issue-number> -b fix/<slug>-<issue-number> origin/main
b. Work inside the worktree — never in the main checkout.
c. Implement the fix, keeping changes minimal and focused.
d. Verify locally: cd mcp && npm run build && npm run test
e. Commit with conventional-changelog format:
git commit -m 'fix(<scope>): 🔒 <english description>
Closes #<issue-number>'
f. Push and create PR:
git push github fix/<slug>-<issue-number>
gh pr create --title "fix(<scope>): 🔒 <summary>" --body "Closes #<issue-number>\n\n<description>" --base main
g. Remove the worktree after PR is created:
cd <original-dir>
git worktree remove ../<repo>-audit-fix-<issue-number>
references/dependency-audit.md Step 4. These can be grouped into a single PR since they modify package.json / package-lock.json.references/verification.md for the verification checklist.gh pr checks <number>
| Task | Read |
|---|---|
| What to review and how to check each category | references/review-strategy.md |
| Security severity classification (TSRC-style) | references/security-severity-checklist.md |
| How to classify, deduplicate, and batch findings | references/classification.md |
| How to create well-structured GitHub issues | references/issue-workflow.md |
| How to create worktrees and fix issues in isolation | references/worktree-fix.md |
| How to verify fixes and generate the final report | references/verification.md |
| How to audit and fix dependency vulnerabilities | references/dependency-audit.md |
Follow the project's conventional-changelog format:
fix(<scope>): 🔒 <english description>
Closes #<issue-number>
Scope examples: security, deps, error-handling, type-safety, code-quality, cloudrun, database, functions
Alternatives
majiayu000/spellbook
Use it for engineering and design tasks; the detail page covers purpose, installation, and practical steps.
ruvnet/RuView
Comprehensive GitHub code review with AI-powered swarm coordination
dotnet/skills
Grades a specified set of test methods individually and produces a concise table mapping each test (fully-qualified name) to a letter grade (A–F), a score band, and a one-line note — designed to be posted as a PR comment. Use when the caller wants per-test feedback on a curated list of methods (for example, the new or modified tests in a pull request), not a suite-wide audit. Polyglot: .NET, Python, TS/JS, Java, Go, Ruby, Rust, Swift, Kotlin, PowerShell, C++. Input is a list of test methods (or
ruvnet/ruflo
Comprehensive GitHub code review with AI-powered swarm coordination