Brooks Review
hyhmrright/brooks-lint
PR code review that surfaces decay risks, design smells, and maintainability issues with concrete Symptom → Source → Consequence → Remedy findings, drawing on twelve classic engineering books.
Perform a structured code review by composing validation checklists from relevant atoms based on what code changed.
$ npx skills add techygarg/lattice --skill review -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install techygarg/lattice 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/techygarg/lattice.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/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/techygarg/lattice/tree/main/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/techygarg/lattice/tree/main/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 techygarg/lattice --skill review -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install techygarg/lattice review --agent codexProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/techygarg/lattice.git skills-src && mkdir -p .agents/skills && cp -r skills-src/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/techygarg/lattice/tree/main/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 techygarg/lattice --skill review -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install techygarg/lattice review --agent cursorProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/techygarg/lattice.git skills-src && mkdir -p .cursor/skills && cp -r skills-src/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/techygarg/lattice/tree/main/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/techygarg/lattice.git --path 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 techygarg/lattice --skill review -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install techygarg/lattice review --agent gemini-cliProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/techygarg/lattice.git skills-src && mkdir -p .gemini/skills && cp -r skills-src/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/techygarg/lattice/tree/main/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 techygarg/lattice 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 techygarg/lattice --skill review -a github-copilotProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.copilot/skills/.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/techygarg/lattice.git skills-src && mkdir -p .github/skills && cp -r skills-src/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/techygarg/lattice/tree/main/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 techygarg/lattice --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 techygarg/lattice review --agent opencodeProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/techygarg/lattice.git skills-src && mkdir -p .opencode/skills && cp -r skills-src/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/techygarg/lattice/tree/main/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.
reviewPerform a structured code review by composing validation checklists from relevant atoms based on what code changed.
Review is an agent skill from techygarg/lattice. Perform a structured code review by composing validation checklists from relevant atoms based on what code changed. Loads atoms conditionally -- clean-code always, architecture/DDD/security/tests only when the delta touches their domain. Produces a severity-ordered report with specific locations and fixes. Use when the user asks to 'review this', 'code review', 'quality check', 'validate the code', 'check my code', 'review the delta', or 'review this PR'.
Its SKILL.md is about 3.2k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. It is a single SKILL.md file with no bundled scripts.
It sits in Development, covering Domain-driven design, Code quality and Code review. The repository describes itself as: Install engineering discipline into any AI coding assistant. Composable skills for design, implementation, review, and team standards. Better process, not just better prompts. The licence is MIT.
5 steps, taken from the step headings in SKILL.md.
Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit 4d6c35f. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.
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.
Shell commands in SKILL.md call:
gitFrom the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.
No URLs in SKILL.md. Its commands use git, which can reach the network depending on how they are called.
From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.
Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.
From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.
Review loads about 3.2k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 117 tokens; SKILL.md has 1,404 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.
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.
The full file from techygarg/lattice at commit 4d6c35f, republished under its MIT licence (© techygarg). 1,404 words, ~3,184 tokens.
.claude/skills/review/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).Load/apply skills based on scope (see Step 2 for conditional loading):
framework:knowledge-priming -- Load project context (tech stack, architecture, conventions) to evaluate against real standards (always loaded)framework:learning-harvest -- Load prior operational learnings inform review; harvest new patterns at session end (always)framework:collaborative-judgment -- Surface borderline findings with both interpretations instead of silently classifying (always loaded)framework:clean-code -- Code craft: SRP, naming, complexity, error handling (always loaded)framework:architecture -- Structural: layer rules, dependency direction, architectural flows (conditional)framework:domain-driven-design -- Domain modeling: aggregates, entities, value objects (conditional)framework:secure-coding -- Security: trust boundaries, injection, secrets, input handling (conditional)framework:test-quality -- Test: AAA structure, isolation, assertions, naming (conditional)Review molecule supports optional config thru review-standards doc from review-refiner (or hand-written). Configures review process — not what atoms check (that's atom-level config via atom refiners).
Resolution steps:
.lattice/config.yaml in repo root.paths.review_standards.mode:mode: overlay: Read embedded defaults first, then apply doc's sections on top. Sections matched by heading — custom replaces matching defaults, new appended.mode: override (or no mode): Custom doc full precedence. Must be comprehensive.Review-standards doc has 7 sections map to workflow steps:
| Section | Affects step |
|---|---|
| §1 Atom Loading Policy | Step 2 (Load Relevant Atoms) |
| §2 Severity Classification | Step 4 (Produce Report) |
| §3 Report Preferences | Step 4 (Produce Report) |
| §4 Scope Rules | Step 1 (Identify the Delta) |
| §5 Insight Capture Preferences | Step 5 (Harvest Learnings and Log Review) |
| §6 Health Log Preferences | Step 5 (Harvest Learnings and Log Review) |
| §7 Custom Review Dimensions | Step 3 (Run Targeted Validation) |
Each step notes where config applies with "Config override" callouts.
Use framework:learning-harvest Load behavior. Focus hint: "review session — focus: all categories".
Determine what code reviewing & establish scope.
git diff for changed files/lines. Delta is changes, not entire codebase.Classify delta:
architecture loads.domain_folder or containing aggregates, entities, value objects) -- determines if domain-driven-design loads.secure-coding loads.test-quality loads.Config override (§4 Scope Rules): If review-standards doc defines scope rules, apply after identifying delta:
Always load: framework:clean-code -- applies to all code regardless of layer/purpose.
Conditionally load based on delta classification:
| Condition | Load |
|---|---|
| Delta touches multiple layers, adds new files, or changes file locations | framework:architecture |
| Delta includes files in domain folder or modifies domain objects | framework:domain-driven-design |
| Delta touches trust boundaries (HTTP handlers, auth, DB queries, external APIs, secrets, config) | framework:secure-coding |
| Delta includes test files | framework:test-quality |
When multiple atoms load, run independently -- each atom's checklist applied to parts of delta relevant to it. Findings from different atoms merged Step 4.
Config override (§1 Atom Loading Policy): If review-standards doc defines atom loading rules, apply instead of (override) or on top of (overlay) table above:
secure-coding every review). clean-code and knowledge-priming must remain always-loaded regardless of config.For each loaded atom, apply two passes against delta:
Pass 1 -- Self-Validation Checklist: Walk thru atom's Self-Validation Checklist (numbered items in atom's SKILL.md). For each check, examine if any code in delta violates. Record violations with:
Pass 2 -- Anti-Pattern Scan: Walk thru atom's Active Anti-Pattern Scan (checkbox items in atom's SKILL.md). For each anti-pattern, check if delta exhibits symptom. Record matches with:
Scope rule: Focus on delta. Don't review unchanged code unless change in delta creates new violation in surrounding code (e.g., new dependency breaks dependency rule for existing file). When reviewing surrounding code, note finding originates from delta's impact, not pre-existing issues.
Config override (§7 Custom Review Dimensions): If review-standards doc defines custom review dimensions, run after atom validation passes:
Default to summary mode. Use full mode if user asked for detailed/comprehensive review.
Summary mode (default):
Present top issues ordered by severity, one line each. Cap at most important findings -- don't enumerate every minor issue.
For each finding:
[SEVERITY] file:line -- description (atom-name: check-name)Severity levels:
When finding borderline between severity levels, use framework:collaborative-judgment — note uncertainty inline with both interpretations rather than silently classifying.
End with "What's done well" sentence highlighting something positive about delta -- good naming, proper error handling, clean test structure, correct layer placement.
Full mode (when user asks for detailed/comprehensive review):
Organize findings by atom. For each atom loaded:
## Clean Code
- [warning] src/services/OrderService.ts:45 -- Function `processOrder` does validation,
business logic, and persistence (SRP violation). Extract validation into guard clause,
persistence into repository call.
- [suggestion] src/services/OrderService.ts:72 -- Parameter list has 5 arguments.
Group into `ProcessOrderOptions` object.
## Architecture
- [critical] src/domain/Order.ts:12 -- Inner layer imports from outer layer
(`import { DatabaseClient }`). Violates dependency direction rules.
Define an interface in the inner layer, implement in the outer layer.After all atom sections, add:
Config override (§2 Severity Classification): If review-standards doc defines custom severity levels or per-atom overrides:
Config override (§3 Report Preferences): If review-standards doc defines report preferences:
After presenting report, harvest learnings & log review.
Harvest Learnings — use framework:learning-harvest Harvest behavior:
Session context: "review session — code quality assessment against atom standards". Synthesize and propose cross-cutting patterns from this review — recurring quality anti-patterns, structural issues that keep appearing, reliability gaps. User confirms what enters the document. STOP: complete this before Log Review below.
Log Review — append to .lattice/reviews/review-log.md:
.lattice/reviews/ dir if doesn't exist..lattice/reviews/review-log.md. Create file with # Review Log heading if doesn't exist.## YYYY-MM-DD — [feature/scope name]
- **Scope**: [file count], [layers touched]
- **Atoms**: [atoms loaded for this review]
- **Result**: [critical count] critical, [warning count] warning, [suggestion count] suggestion
- **Key findings**: [top 2-3 specific findings, one line]
- **Strengths**: [one positive highlight]## History summary section at top of file.Config override (§5 Insight Capture Preferences): If review-standards doc defines insight capture preferences:
framework:learning-harvest when proposing candidates.Config override (§6 Health Log Preferences): If review-standards doc defines health log preferences:
© techygarg, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file
Just SKILL.md in skills/review of techygarg/lattice.
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 4d6c35f
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Review this skilltechygarg/lattice | 199 | — | ~3.2k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Brooks Reviewhyhmrright/brooks-lint | 1.5k | 1 repos | ~430 | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| WooCommerce Code Reviewwoocommerce/woocommerce | 11k | 3 repos | ~1.1k | Automated safety check: Pass | Custom licence | |
| Skill Doli Code ReviewDolibarr/dolibarr | 7.7k | 1 repos | ~1.1k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Dignified Python Standardsdocling-project/docling | 69k | — | ~1.5k | Automated safety check: Pass | Apache-2.0 | |
| Clean Code GuardamElnagdy/guard-skills | 1.3k | 2 repos | ~4.3k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT |
hyhmrright/brooks-lint
PR code review that surfaces decay risks, design smells, and maintainability issues with concrete Symptom → Source → Consequence → Remedy findings, drawing on twelve classic engineering books.
woocommerce/woocommerce
Reviews WooCommerce code changes against the project's standards, flagging backend PHP architecture, naming, documentation, data integrity and testing violations.
Dolibarr/dolibarr
Reviews Dolibarr PHP code for compliance with coding standards and security best practices, and fixes identified issues.
docling-project/docling
Applies opinionated production Python conventions chosen by the project's Python version: modern type syntax, pathlib, explicit checks and interface guidance.
amElnagdy/guard-skills
Reviews generated or changed production code against Clean Code, SOLID, DRY, KISS, YAGNI and LLM-specific failure modes before it ships, in any language.
tt-a1i/archify
Review Archify issues, PRs, or code through value, cost, and impact to support evidence-based maintenance decisions. Use for issue triage, change reviews, and…
techygarg/lattice
Architectural thinking partner for an existing repository — scans the codebase, conducts a structured interview, agrees on current architectural state and recommended direction, and produces a…
techygarg/lattice
Guided setup and upgrade-check experience for Lattice projects -- scans the repository, detects existing configuration and outdated conventions, suggests refiners and available upgrades in priority…
techygarg/lattice
Audit and fix all Lattice documentation, README, docs/, PROJECT.md, GitHub issue templates, and CLAUDE.md to ensure they are fully aligned with the current skill inventory.
techygarg/lattice
Validate any Lattice SKILL.md against all tier conventions — atoms, molecules, and refiners.
techygarg/lattice
Facilitate a structured conversation to define architecture principles for a repository.
techygarg/lattice
Facilitate a structured conversation to define clean code principles for a repository.
Categories
Perform a structured code review by composing validation checklists from relevant atoms based on what code changed. Review is an agent skill from techygarg/lattice. Perform a structured code review by composing validation checklists from relevant atoms based on what code changed.
Review fits situations like: the user asks to review this; validate the code; review the delta.
Run `npx skills add techygarg/lattice --skill review -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/review in techygarg/lattice) into .claude/skills/review in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
Run `npx skills add techygarg/lattice --skill review -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/review in techygarg/lattice) into .agents/skills/review in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add techygarg/lattice --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.
Going by SKILL.md and its folder, Review needs the command-line tools its instructions call (git).
SKILL.md contains no URLs. Its commands use git, which can reach the network depending on how they are called. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.
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.
Review is published under the MIT licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.
About 3.2k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 13k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full.
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Review: Brooks Review (hyhmrright/brooks-lint, 1.5k stars), WooCommerce Code Review (woocommerce/woocommerce, 11k stars), Skill Doli Code Review (Dolibarr/dolibarr, 7.7k stars) and Dignified Python Standards (docling-project/docling, 69k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.
techygarg (a GitHub user) maintains it in techygarg/lattice, which has 199 GitHub stars. The repository holds 33 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on October 6, 2026.
Source: techygarg/lattice on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.