> python-code-review

Comprehensive Python code review focused on bugs, correctness, security, maintainability, and actionable fixes. Use when a user asks for a review of Python files, wants severity-rated findings, wants before/after fix suggestions, or wants verification that implementation matches an active plan document (if one exists). Start by applying read-repo-rules to AGENTS.md, docs/REPO_STYLE.md, docs/PYTHON_STYLE.md, and docs/CHANGELOG.md so review guidance follows repository rules.

fetch
$curl "https://skillshub.wtf/vosslab/vosslab-skills/python-code-review?format=md"
SKILL.mdpython-code-review

Python Code Review

Workflow

  1. Verify AGENTS.md, docs/REPO_STYLE.md, docs/PYTHON_STYLE.md, and docs/CHANGELOG.md exist.
  2. Read those files and summarize repo rules in four one-sentence lines with prefixes: AGENTS:, REPO_STYLE:, PYTHON_STYLE:, CHANGELOG:.
  3. Inspect changed files first (git diff, git status --short), then inspect related call sites.
  4. If the repo has docs/active_plans/, identify the active plan document(s) that govern the change. Otherwise, skip plan-conformance steps.
  5. If an active plan exists, map code and tests to plan requirements, acceptance criteria, and stated constraints. Otherwise, skip this step.
  6. Prioritize findings by severity: plan mismatch/regressions (if applicable), correctness/safety, then maintainability.
  7. Provide concrete, minimal fixes with before/after examples when a fix is straightforward.
  8. Flag uncertainty explicitly and ask targeted review questions for unclear logic or contracts.

Review Output Contract

  • Report findings first, ordered by severity.
  • For each finding include:
    • Severity (P1 critical, P2 high, P3 medium, P4 low)
    • File path and line reference
    • Risk and likely impact
    • Recommended change
  • After findings, include:
    • Open questions
    • Test gaps and residual risk
    • Brief summary

What To Check

  • Plan conformance: implementation and tests match active plan scope, ordering, and acceptance criteria.
  • Plan drift: behavior changed without corresponding plan/changelog updates, or plan claims complete while code is partial.
  • Correctness: edge cases, off-by-one logic, stale assumptions, API misuse, compatibility breaks.
  • Security: unsafe eval/exec, command injection, path traversal, deserialization hazards, weak validation.
  • Maintainability: dead code, hidden coupling, unclear naming, duplicated logic, brittle tests.
  • Performance only when materially relevant.

Fix Guidance

  • Prefer small, local edits that preserve behavior unless a bug requires behavior change.
  • Keep fixes aligned with repo Python style and test conventions.
  • Add or adjust tests for each behavior-changing fix.

┌ stats

installs/wk0
░░░░░░░░░░
github stars1
░░░░░░░░░░
first seenMar 18, 2026
└────────────

┌ repo

vosslab/vosslab-skills
by vosslab
└────────────

┌ tags

└────────────