Code Review Skill
awesome-skills/code-review-skill
Provides comprehensive code review guidance for React 19, Vue 3, Angular 17+, Svelte 5, Rust, TypeScript, Java, Java 8, PHP, Ruby, Rails, Python, Django, FastAPI, Go, C/.NET, Kotlin, Swift, Dart…
Reviews or re-reviews a Docling pull request in fixed stages, with findings that can be reproduced and an explicit record of every check that was run.
Install Docling Pull Request Review
$ npx skills add docling-project/docling --skill review -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install docling-project/docling review --agent claude-codeProject scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/docling-project/docling.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/.agents/skills/review .claude/skills/review && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.
Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/
Install the "review" agent skill from https://github.com/docling-project/docling/tree/main/.agents/skills/review into .claude/skills/review/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "review", then confirm the skill loads.Claude Code copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$skill-installer install https://github.com/docling-project/docling/tree/main/.agents/skills/reviewType this inside Codex. $skill-installer <name> installs a curated skill from openai/skills. The installer writes to $CODEX_HOME/skills (default ~/.codex/skills). Restart Codex if the skill does not show up.
$ npx skills add docling-project/docling --skill review -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install docling-project/docling review --agent codexProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/docling-project/docling.git skills-src && mkdir -p .agents/skills && cp -r skills-src/.agents/skills/review .agents/skills/review && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.agents/skills/ instead of .agents/skills for a personal install.
Codex skills documentation · loads skills from .agents/skills/
Install the "review" agent skill from https://github.com/docling-project/docling/tree/main/.agents/skills/review into .agents/skills/review/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "review", then confirm the skill loads.Codex copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ npx skills add docling-project/docling --skill review -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install docling-project/docling review --agent cursorProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/docling-project/docling.git skills-src && mkdir -p .cursor/skills && cp -r skills-src/.agents/skills/review .cursor/skills/review && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.cursor/skills/ instead of .cursor/skills for a personal install.
Cursor skills documentation · loads skills from .cursor/skills/, .agents/skills/, .claude/skills/, .codex/skills/
Install the "review" agent skill from https://github.com/docling-project/docling/tree/main/.agents/skills/review into .cursor/skills/review/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "review", then confirm the skill loads.Cursor copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ gemini skills install https://github.com/docling-project/docling.git --path .agents/skills/review--scope user (default) or --scope workspace; --path is the subfolder of the repo that holds the skill; --consent skips the security confirmation prompt.
$ npx skills add docling-project/docling --skill review -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install docling-project/docling review --agent gemini-cliProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/docling-project/docling.git skills-src && mkdir -p .gemini/skills && cp -r skills-src/.agents/skills/review .gemini/skills/review && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.gemini/skills/ instead of .gemini/skills for a personal install, then run /skills reload.
Gemini CLI skills documentation · loads skills from .gemini/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "review" agent skill from https://github.com/docling-project/docling/tree/main/.agents/skills/review into .gemini/skills/review/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "review", then confirm the skill loads.Gemini CLI copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ gh skill install docling-project/docling reviewInstalls for Copilot at project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Preview a skill first with gh skill preview. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).
$ npx skills add docling-project/docling --skill review -a github-copilotProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.copilot/skills/.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/docling-project/docling.git skills-src && mkdir -p .github/skills && cp -r skills-src/.agents/skills/review .github/skills/review && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.copilot/skills/ instead of .github/skills for a personal install. Commit .github/skills so cloud agent and code review can use it.
GitHub Copilot skills documentation · loads skills from .github/skills/, .claude/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "review" agent skill from https://github.com/docling-project/docling/tree/main/.agents/skills/review into .github/skills/review/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "review", then confirm the skill loads.GitHub Copilot copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ npx skills add docling-project/docling --skill review -a opencodeOpenCode documents no install command of its own. Project install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.config/opencode/skills/.
$ gh skill install docling-project/docling review --agent opencodeProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/docling-project/docling.git skills-src && mkdir -p .opencode/skills && cp -r skills-src/.agents/skills/review .opencode/skills/review && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.config/opencode/skills/ instead of .opencode/skills for a personal install.
OpenCode skills documentation · loads skills from .opencode/skills/, .claude/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "review" agent skill from https://github.com/docling-project/docling/tree/main/.agents/skills/review into .opencode/skills/review/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "review", then confirm the skill loads.OpenCode copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
Facts
- Skill name
review- GitHub stars
- 69k
- Token cost
- ~1k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 561 words
- Files
- 1
- Skills in repo
- 4
- Repo updated
- First seen
- Licence
- MIT
At a glance
Reviews or re-reviews a Docling pull request in fixed stages, with findings that can be reproduced and an explicit record of every check that was run.
- Works in 4 steps: Fix the review scope → Check behavior and tests → Run the applicable checks → …
- Reviewing an incoming pull request to the Docling repository
- SKILL.md covers 1. Fix the review scope, 2. Check behavior and tests, 3. Run the applicable checks and 4. Give a precise verdict
- Calls make and python3
What it does
The review has set stages, each with an exit condition. It fixes the scope by reading the live PR description, diff, reviews and CI results, recording the base and head commit IDs and working in an isolated worktree; for a re-review it reads each open finding and the author's reply. It then follows input through the affected code to the user-visible result, checking conversion changes against the source content, DoclingDocument ownership and order, and the exports, including nested and non-text content.
A bug fix gets a small case run on base and head, where the regression test must fail on the original defect and pass with the fix. The review also looks at public types, Python 3.10 support, defaults, error paths and optional dependencies, inspects test assertions and changed reference data, and checks how work grows with input size without using noisy timing thresholds as a gate. Checks come from AGENTS.md: make validate when making changes, make check and targeted tests for a read-only review, plus a script that validates contributor skill routes.
When your agent uses it
- Reviewing an incoming pull request to the Docling repository
- Re-reviewing a PR after the author has answered earlier findings
- Checking that a bug fix's regression test fails on the original code
- Reviewing changes to dependencies, docs or agent guidance in Docling
Example prompts
- “Review the open Docling PR that changes table export and list reproducible findings.”
- “Re-review this PR now that the author pushed fixes, and tell me which earlier findings are resolved.”
- “Check whether the regression test in this Docling fix fails on the base commit.”
Requirements
- A checkout of the Docling repository
- make and the commands listed in its AGENTS.md
Workflow steps
4 steps, taken from the step headings in SKILL.md.
What it can do on your machine
Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit 638c43a. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.
Tool permissions
Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.
From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.
Runs code
Shell commands in SKILL.md call:
makepython3
From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.
Network
No URLs in SKILL.md.
From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.
Credentials
Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.
From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.
Context cost
Docling Pull Request Review loads about 1k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 45 tokens; SKILL.md has 561 words of instructions outside code blocks.
Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.
Safety
Auto-check passed
The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.
Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.
SKILL.md
The full file from docling-project/docling at commit 638c43a, republished under its MIT licence (© docling-project). 561 words, ~1,022 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/review/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).- name
- review
- description
- Review or re-review a Docling pull request with reproducible findings and explicit validation results. Use for code, tests, dependencies, documentation, or agent guidance.
Review a Docling pull request
Use these steps for every review. Human reviewers can use the same steps. Explain the affected contract so that a reviewer need not know Docling internals. Read AGENTS.md and load other applicable task routes. For document conversion without repository changes, use the package usage skill.
1. Fix the review scope
Read the live PR description, diff, reviews, and CI results. Record the base and head commit IDs. Use an isolated worktree; preserve other changes and staging. For a re-review, read each open finding and the author's response.
Exit: The changed files and affected contracts are known. The reviewed head is exact, and prior findings are listed for verification.
2. Check behavior and tests
Follow input through the affected code to the user-visible result.
- For conversion changes, check source content,
DoclingDocumentownership and order, and the affected exports. Check nested and non-text content where relevant. Text presence or item counts alone do not prove correct structure. - For a bug fix, run a small case on base and head when practical. The regression test must fail for the original defect and pass with the fix. State any limit.
- Check public types, Python 3.10 support, defaults, error paths, and optional dependencies where affected. Prefer explicit contracts to attribute probing.
- Inspect test assertions and changed reference data. Confirm that they detect the defect rather than accept the new output without a reason.
- For loops over document content, check how work grows with input size. Compare base and head on the same input when needed. Do not use noisy timing thresholds as a correctness gate.
Exit: Each affected contract has evidence, or an explicit unchecked limit. Every prior finding is confirmed fixed or still reproducible on the new head.
Show full SKILL.md (272 more words)Show less
3. Run the applicable checks
Use the commands in AGENTS.md. For changes you make, run make validate, inspect
hook edits, and repeat until it passes. For a read-only review, use make check
and targeted tests. Do not regenerate reference data during a read-only review.
Inspect CI on the exact reviewed head and explain failures that affect the verdict.
python3 .github/scripts/check_skill_routes.py checks contributor skill routes
and Codex/Claude links. Existing Ruff, ty, Tach, and lock checks check code and
dependency rules. These checks do not prove conversion quality, test adequacy,
or full ASD-STE100 compliance. Those decisions require review.
Exit: Record commands, results, reviewed commit, and checks not run. Never describe skipped, pending, or failed checks as passed.
4. Give a precise verdict
Use one finding per defect. Include its location, trigger, actual and expected behavior, user impact, and reproduction or test evidence. Link the affected code. Use these severity terms consistently:
| Severity | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Blocker | Security defect, data loss, incorrect supported behavior, or a required check failure. Request changes. |
| Suggestion | A useful improvement with no demonstrated contract failure. Do not block on preference. |
| Question | Evidence is missing. Ask for the specific evidence; do not assert a defect. |
Approve only when no blocker remains and relevant validation is complete. If required evidence is unavailable, state the limit and withhold approval. Post reviews or comments only when the user has authorized that action. Before posting, confirm that the PR head still matches the reviewed commit. If it changed, check the new diff and repeat affected validation. Avoid duplicate findings.
Exit: The verdict identifies the reviewed head, blockers, validation results,
and limits. Follow the communication rule in AGENTS.md.
© docling-project, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file
Files
Just SKILL.md in .agents/skills/review of docling-project/docling.
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 638c43a
Compare with similar skills
Docling Pull Request Review next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.
| Skill | Stars | Used in | Tokens | Auto-check | Licence | Repo updated |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Docling Pull Request Review this skilldocling-project/docling | 69k | — | ~1k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Code Review Skillawesome-skills/code-review-skill | 2.1k | — | ~2.8k | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT | |
| Code Reviewerjewbetcha/opentrace | 116 | 2 repos | ~1.1k | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT | |
| Code Graph RAG Pull Request Reviewvitali87/code-graph-rag | 5.2k | — | ~685 | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Coding Agentmastra-ai/mastra | 29k | — | ~2.3k | Automated safety check: Pass | Custom licence | |
| Code Review SkillRain-kl/OpenFlare | 288 | — | ~2.3k | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT |
Similar skills
Code Reviewer
jewbetcha/opentrace
Comprehensive code review skill for TypeScript, JavaScript, Python, Swift, Kotlin, Go.
Code Graph RAG Pull Request Review
vitali87/code-graph-rag
Reviews pull requests to code-graph-rag, watching for wrong or missing graph edges in language parsers, cross-language consistency and tests that really exercise a fix.
Coding Agent
mastra-ai/mastra
Authoring playbook for building agents that write, edit, review, or refactor code.
Code Review Skill
Rain-kl/OpenFlare
Provides comprehensive code review guidance for React 19, Vue 3, Angular 17+, Svelte 5, Rust, TypeScript, Java, PHP, Python, Django, Go, C/.NET, Kotlin, Swift, NestJS, C/C++, and more.
Create PR
beyonders-studio/initiative
Open a pull request for the current changes, then watch it to green — poll CI and the Greptile review together, addressing review findings as soon as they post instead of waiting for the full…
More from docling-project/docling
Building Pydantic AI Agents
docling-project/docling
Patterns and tested examples for building agents with Pydantic AI: tools, capabilities, structured output, dependency injection, hooks, YAML specs, streaming and testing.
Docling Document Conversion
docling-project/docling
Converts PDFs, Office files, HTML, images and other documents into a unified DoclingDocument with Markdown or JSON output, through the docling CLI, Python SDK or a remote service.
Dignified Python Standards
docling-project/docling
Applies opinionated production Python conventions chosen by the project's Python version: modern type syntax, pathlib, explicit checks and interface guidance.
Related
Works with
Categories
Questions about Docling Pull Request Review
What does Docling Pull Request Review do?
Reviews or re-reviews a Docling pull request in fixed stages, with findings that can be reproduced and an explicit record of every check that was run. The review has set stages, each with an exit condition. It fixes the scope by reading the live PR description, diff, reviews and CI results, recording the base and head commit IDs and working in an isolated worktree; for a re-review it reads each open finding and the author's reply.
When should I use Docling Pull Request Review?
Docling Pull Request Review fits situations like: reviewing an incoming pull request to the Docling repository; re-reviewing a PR after the author has answered earlier findings; checking that a bug fix's regression test fails on the original code; reviewing changes to dependencies, docs or agent guidance in Docling.
How do I install Docling Pull Request Review in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add docling-project/docling --skill review -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (.agents/skills/review in docling-project/docling) into .claude/skills/review in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Docling Pull Request Review in Codex?
Run `npx skills add docling-project/docling --skill review -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (.agents/skills/review in docling-project/docling) into .agents/skills/review in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Docling Pull Request Review in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?
Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add docling-project/docling --skill review -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/review, .gemini/skills/review, .github/skills/review and .opencode/skills/review in your project.
What does Docling Pull Request Review need to run?
Going by SKILL.md and its folder, Docling Pull Request Review needs the command-line tools its instructions call (make and python3). Our summary lists: A checkout of the Docling repository; make and the commands listed in its AGENTS.md.
Does Docling Pull Request Review access the network?
SKILL.md contains no URLs. Any network use would come from the scripts or tools the agent runs. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.
Is Docling Pull Request Review safe to install?
Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. Review the folder before installing.
What licence does Docling Pull Request Review use?
Docling Pull Request Review is published under the MIT licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.
How many tokens does Docling Pull Request Review use?
About 1k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 4.1k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full.
What are the alternatives to Docling Pull Request Review?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Docling Pull Request Review: Code Review Skill (awesome-skills/code-review-skill, 2.1k stars), Code Reviewer (jewbetcha/opentrace, 116 stars), Code Graph RAG Pull Request Review (vitali87/code-graph-rag, 5.2k stars) and Coding Agent (mastra-ai/mastra, 29k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.
Who maintains Docling Pull Request Review?
docling-project (a GitHub organization) maintains it in docling-project/docling, which has 68,515 GitHub stars. The repository holds 4 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on October 8, 2026.
Source: docling-project/docling on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.