Agent skill

Phase 8 Review

by ww-w-ai in ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code

Verify codebase quality — architecture consistency, convention compliance, gap analysis.

Apache-2.0Auto-check passedDevelopment

Install Phase 8 Review

skills CLI
$ npx skills add ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code --skill phase-8-review -a claude-code

Project install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.

GitHub CLI
$ gh skill install ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code phase-8-review --agent claude-code

Project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).

Manual copy
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/phase-8-review .claude/skills/phase-8-review && rm -rf skills-src

Use ~/.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/

Facts

Skill name
phase-8-review
GitHub stars
601
Token cost
~3.7k tokens
SKILL.md length
474 words
Files
1
Skills in repo
44
Repo updated
First seen
Licence
Apache-2.0

At a glance

Verify codebase quality — architecture consistency, convention compliance, gap analysis.

  • Development work in your project
  • SKILL.md covers Purpose, What to Do in This Phase, Deliverables and PDCA Application, plus 12 more sections
  • Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md

What it does

Phase 8 Review is an agent skill from ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code. Verify codebase quality — architecture consistency, convention compliance, gap analysis. Triggers: code review, architecture check, quality, gap analysis default: bkit:code-analyzer validate: bkit:design-validator gap: bkit:gap-detector qa: bkit:qa-strategist team: bkit:cto-lead

Its SKILL.md is about 3.7k 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. The repository describes itself as: bkit Vibecoding Kit - PDCA methodology + Claude Code mastery for AI-native development. The licence is Apache-2.0.

When your agent uses it

  • Development work in your project

Example prompts

  • “/phase-8-review”

Requirements

  • Pre-approved tools (allowed-tools): Read, Glob, Grep, LSP, Task

What it can do on your machine

Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit 85b4913. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.

  • Tool permissions

    Pre-approves these tools, so the agent can use them without asking each time:

    • Read
    • Glob
    • Grep
    • LSP
    • Task

    From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.

  • Runs code

    No scripts in the folder and no shell commands in SKILL.md (its code samples are typescript, markdown and bash).

    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

Phase 8 Review loads about 3.7k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 74 tokens; SKILL.md has 474 words of instructions outside code blocks.

Always · name and description, kept in context so the agent knows when to use it
~74
When it runs · the whole SKILL.md, loaded when a task matches
~3.7k

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 ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code at commit 85b4913, republished under its Apache-2.0 licence (© ww-w-ai). 474 words, ~3,674 tokens.

Download SKILL.mdSave it as .claude/skills/phase-8-review/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).
name
phase-8-review
description
Verify codebase quality — architecture consistency, convention compliance, gap analysis. Triggers: code review, architecture check, quality, gap analysis default: bkit:code-analyzer validate: bkit:design-validator gap: bkit:gap-detector qa: bkit:qa-strategist team: bkit:cto-lead
allowed-tools
Read, Glob, Grep, LSP, Task
context
fork
background
false
classification
workflow
classification-reason
Process automation persists regardless of model advancement
deprecation-risk
none
effort
high
user-invocable
false
next-skill
phase-9-deployment
pdca-phase
check
task-template
[Phase-8] {feature}

Phase 8: Architecture/Convention Review

Overall codebase quality verification

Purpose

Review the entire codebase before deployment. Identify architecture consistency, convention compliance, and potential issues.

What to Do in This Phase

  1. Architecture Review: Review structural consistency
  2. Convention Review: Verify rule compliance
  3. Code Quality Review: Duplication, complexity, potential bugs
  4. Refactoring: Fix discovered issues

Deliverables

docs/03-analysis/
├── architecture-review.md      # Architecture review
├── convention-review.md        # Convention review
└── refactoring-plan.md         # Refactoring plan

PDCA Application

  • Plan: Define review scope/criteria
  • Design: Design checklist
  • Do: Execute code review
  • Check: Analyze issues
  • Act: Refactor and proceed to Phase 9

Level-wise Application

LevelApplication Method
StarterCan be skipped (simple projects)
DynamicRequired
EnterpriseRequired + security review

Full Phase Verification Matrix

Cross-Phase Consistency Verification

Phase 8 verifies that all Phase outputs and rules are consistently applied.

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                    Cross-Phase Dependency Flow                    │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                                                                  │
│   Phase 1 (Schema/Terminology)                                   │
│       ↓ Glossary, entity definitions                             │
│   Phase 2 (Coding Convention)                                    │
│       ↓ Naming rules, environment variable conventions           │
│   Phase 3 (Mockup)                                               │
│       ↓ Component structure, Props design                        │
│   Phase 4 (API)                                                  │
│       ↓ RESTful principles, response format, error codes         │
│   Phase 5 (Design System)                                        │
│       ↓ Design tokens, component variants                        │
│   Phase 6 (UI Implementation)                                    │
│       ↓ API client, type sharing, error handling                 │
│   Phase 7 (SEO/Security)                                         │
│       ↓ Security rules, metadata                                 │
│   Phase 8 (Review) ← Current stage: Full verification            │
│       ↓                                                          │
│   Phase 9 (Deployment)                                           │
│                                                                  │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Phase-specific Verification Checklist
Phase 1 → Verify: Terminology/Schema Consistency
□ Are glossary.md terms consistently used in code?
  - Business terms → Code naming matching
  - Global standard terms → API response field names matching
□ Do entity definitions match actual types?
□ Do relationship definitions match actual implementation?
Phase 2 → Verify: Convention Compliance
□ Naming rule compliance (PascalCase, camelCase, UPPER_SNAKE_CASE)
□ Folder structure rule compliance
□ Environment variable naming rule compliance (NEXT_PUBLIC_*, DB_*, API_*, etc.)
□ .env.example template completion
□ Environment variable validation logic (lib/env.ts) exists
Phase 4 → Verify: API Consistency
□ RESTful principle compliance
  - Resource-based URLs (nouns, plural)
  - Correct HTTP method usage
  - Status code consistency
□ Response format consistency
  - Success: { data, meta? }
  - Error: { error: { code, message, details? } }
  - Pagination: { data, pagination }
□ Error code standardization (matches ERROR_CODES constant)
Phase 5 → Verify: Design System Consistency
□ Are design tokens defined? (CSS Variables / ThemeData)
□ Do components use tokens? (no hardcoded colors)
□ Are component variants consistent?
□ Dark mode support (if defined)
Phase 6 → Verify: UI-API Integration Consistency
□ API client layer structure compliance
  - Components → hooks → services → apiClient
  - No direct fetch calls
□ Type consistency
  - Phase 4 API spec types = Phase 6 client types
□ Error handling consistency
  - Global error handler usage
  - Error code-specific handling logic
□ State management pattern consistency
Phase 7 → Verify: Security/SEO Application
□ Authentication/authorization middleware applied
□ Input validation (server-side)
□ XSS, CSRF defense
□ No sensitive info exposed to client
□ SEO meta tags applied
Phase 9 → Verify: Deployment Readiness
□ Environment variable Secrets registered (based on Phase 2 list)
□ Environment separation (dev/staging/prod)
□ Build successful
□ Environment variable validation script passes

Clean Architecture Verification

Layer Separation Principles
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                      Presentation Layer                      │
│         (pages, components, hooks - UI concerns)             │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                      Application Layer                       │
│         (services, use-cases - business logic)               │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                       Domain Layer                           │
│         (entities, types - core domain models)               │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                    Infrastructure Layer                      │
│         (api client, db, external services)                  │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Dependency direction: Outside → Inside (Presentation → Domain)
Inner layers must not know about outer layers
Layer-specific Verification Checklist
Presentation Layer (UI)
□ Is there business logic in components?
□ Are there direct API calls? (should go through hooks)
□ Is state management properly separated?
□ Do components have single responsibility?
Application Layer (Services)
□ Are domain logic and infrastructure logic separated?
□ Are external dependencies abstracted?
□ Is the structure testable?
□ Are use cases clearly defined?
Domain Layer (Types/Entities)
□ Are there no external library dependencies?
□ Does it contain only pure business rules?
□ Do types match Phase 1 schema?
Infrastructure Layer (API Client)
□ Are external service calls abstracted?
□ Is error handling consistent?
□ Is configuration managed via environment variables?

Architecture Review Checklist

Structure
  • Does folder structure match conventions
  • Is separation of concerns well done
  • Is dependency direction correct (outside → inside)
Patterns
  • Are consistent patterns used
  • Is there unnecessary abstraction
  • Is proper encapsulation done

Convention Review Checklist

Naming
  • Does it follow Phase 2 defined rules
  • Are meaningful names used
  • Is there consistency
Code Style
  • Unified indentation, quotes, etc.
  • Is file length appropriate
  • Is function length appropriate

Code Quality Checklist

  • Is there duplicate code
  • Are there highly complex functions
  • Is error handling appropriate
  • Is type safety ensured

AI-Assisted Review

Request code review from Claude:

"Review this project's code.
- Does it follow CONVENTIONS.md rules
- Is there architecture consistency
- Are there potential bugs or improvements"

Template

See templates/pipeline/phase-8-review.template.md

Next Phase

Phase 9: Deployment → After review completion, deploy to production


6. In-Depth Code Quality Review

Show full SKILL.md (191 more words)Show less
6.1 Duplicate Code Detection
Detection Methods
bash
# 1. Search for similar function names
grep -r "function.*format" src/
grep -r "function.*calculate" src/
grep -r "function.*get.*By" src/

# 2. Search for similar patterns
grep -rn "reduce.*sum" src/
grep -rn "filter.*map" src/
grep -rn "useState.*useEffect" src/
Handling by Duplication Type
TypeExampleSolution
Exact duplicateSame code copy-pasteExtract to function
Structural similaritySame logic, different dataParameterize
Conceptual similarityDifferent implementations for similar purposeIntegrate or interface
Duplicate Code Checklist
□ Is the same logic in 2+ places?
□ Are there multiple functions with similar names?
□ Is the same data transformation repeated?
□ Are similar UI patterns repeated?
□ Is the same API call pattern repeated?
□ Is similar error handling repeated?
6.2 Reusability Assessment
Assessment Criteria
ScoreCriteriaDescription
⭐⭐⭐HighCan be used in other projects
⭐⭐MediumCan be used in multiple places within same project
⭐LowUsed only for specific feature
Reusability Checklist
Check for each function/component:
□ Is it tied to a specific domain?
□ Does it depend on external state?
□ Are parameters generic?
□ Is the return value predictable?
□ Are there side effects?
6.3 Extensibility Assessment
Extensibility Check
When new requirements come:
□ Can it be added without modifying existing code?
□ Can behavior be changed by configuration only?
□ Is adding new types/cases easy?
□ Can it be extended without adding conditionals?
Extensibility Anti-patterns
typescript
// ❌ Requires modification for each extension
function process(type: string) {
  if (type === 'a') { /* ... */ }
  else if (type === 'b') { /* ... */ }
  // Add else if for each new type...
}

// ❌ Hardcoded list
const ALLOWED_TYPES = ['a', 'b', 'c']

// ❌ Enumerated switch statements
switch (action.type) {
  case 'ADD': // ...
  case 'REMOVE': // ...
  // Add case for each new action...
}
Good Extensibility Patterns
typescript
// ✅ Registry pattern
const handlers: Record<string, Handler> = {}
function register(type: string, handler: Handler) {
  handlers[type] = handler
}
function process(type: string, data: unknown) {
  return handlers[type]?.(data)
}

// ✅ Configuration-based
const CONFIG = {
  types: ['a', 'b', 'c'],
  handlers: { ... }
}

// ✅ Plugin structure
interface Plugin { execute(data): Result }
const plugins: Plugin[] = []
6.4 Object-Oriented Principles Check
SOLID Principles Checklist

S - Single Responsibility (SRP)

□ Does the class/function change for only one reason?
□ Does the name clearly explain the role?
□ Is "and" in the name? → Needs separation

O - Open/Closed (OCP)

□ Is it open for extension? (new features can be added)
□ Is it closed for modification? (no existing code changes needed)
□ Are interfaces/abstractions used?

L - Liskov Substitution (LSP)

□ Can subtypes replace parent types?
□ Do overridden methods keep the contract?

I - Interface Segregation (ISP)

□ Is the interface too large?
□ Must unused methods be implemented?
□ Can the interface be split smaller?

D - Dependency Inversion (DIP)

□ Does it depend on abstractions instead of concrete classes?
□ Are dependencies injected? (DI)
□ Is the structure testable?
6.5 Refactoring Priority
Urgent (Required before deployment):
1. Duplication that can cause bugs
2. Security vulnerabilities
3. Performance bottlenecks

High (As soon as possible):
4. Same logic duplicated in 3+ places
5. Files over 200 lines
6. Nesting deeper than 5 levels

Medium (Next sprint):
7. Structure lacking extensibility
8. Naming inconsistencies
9. Structure difficult to test

Low (Backlog):
10. Style inconsistencies
11. Excessive comments
12. Unused code

7. AI Code Review Request Template

markdown
Please review the code from these perspectives:

1. Duplicate Code
   - Are there similar functions/components?
   - Is there common logic that can be extracted?

2. Reusability
   - Can it be used generically?
   - Is it tied to a specific domain?

3. Extensibility
   - Can it flexibly respond to new requirements?
   - Are there hardcoded parts?

4. SOLID Principles
   - Does it follow single responsibility?
   - Is it open for extension and closed for modification?

5. Convention Compliance
   - Does it follow CONVENTIONS.md rules?
   - Is naming consistent?

Please identify parts that need refactoring and their priority.

8. Gap Analysis (Design vs Implementation)

Gap Analysis Report Template
markdown
# Gap Analysis Report

## Analysis Target
- Design document: docs/02-design/{feature}.design.md
- Implementation path: src/features/{feature}/

## Results by Category

### API Endpoints
| Design | Implementation | Status |
|--------|----------------|--------|
| POST /api/users | POST /api/users | ✅ Match |
| GET /api/users/:id | - | ❌ Not implemented |
| - | DELETE /api/users/:id | ⚠️ Missing from design |

### Data Model
| Design Entity | Implementation | Status |
|---------------|----------------|--------|
| User | types/user.ts | ✅ Match |
| UserRole | - | ❌ Not implemented |

### Match Rate
- Total items: 10
- Matches: 7
- Not implemented: 2
- Missing from design: 1
- **Match Rate: 70%**
Gap Types and Actions
Gap TypeMeaningAction
✅ MatchDesign = ImplementationNone
❌ Not implementedIn design, not in codeImplement or update design
⚠️ Missing from designIn code, not in designAdd to design document
🔄 DifferentExists but differentAlign (code is truth)
When to Run Gap Analysis
  • After completing feature implementation
  • Before deployment
  • When design document is updated
  • During code review

© ww-w-ai, Apache-2.0. 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 skills/phase-8-review of ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code.

Open the folder on GitHubat commit 85b4913

Compare with similar skills

Phase 8 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.

Phase 8 Review compared with similar skills
SkillStarsUsed inTokensAuto-checkLicenceRepo updated
Phase 8 Review this skillww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code601—~3.7kAutomated safety check: PassApache-2.0
Vercel Composition Patternssupabase/supabase111k58 repos~726Automated safety check: PassMIT
Finishing a Development Branchobra/superpowers297k5 repos~1.9kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Typescript Advanced Typesrolling-scopes/rsschool-app10k25 repos~4.2kAutomated safety check: PassMPL-2.0
PR Babysitteropeninterpreter/openinterpreter69k3 repos~4.2kAutomated safety check: PassApache-2.0
Code Review ChecklistshareAI-lab/learn-claude-code78k4 repos~1.1kAutomated safety check: PassMIT

Similar skills

  • Official

    React composition patterns that scale. An agent skill from supabase/supabase.

    111k GitHub starsUsed in 58 repos~726 tokens
    DevelopmentAuto-check passed
  • Walks the last step of a branch: confirm tests pass, detect the git environment, ask how to integrate, carry out your choice and clean up the worktree.

    297k GitHub starsUsed in 5 repos~1.9k tokens
    DevelopmentAuto-check passed
  • Typescript Advanced Types

    rolling-scopes/rsschool-app

    Master TypeScript's advanced type system including generics, conditional types, mapped types, template literals, and utility types for building type-safe applications.

    10k GitHub starsUsed in 25 repos~4.2k tokens
    DevelopmentAuto-check passed
  • PR Babysitter

    openinterpreter/openinterpreter

    Watches an open GitHub pull request until it merges, handling review comments, diagnosing CI failures and retrying flaky checks along the way.

    69k GitHub starsUsed in 3 repos~4.2k tokens
    DevelopmentAuto-check passed
  • Code Review Checklist

    shareAI-lab/learn-claude-code

    Reviews code against a five-part checklist covering security, correctness, performance, maintainability and testing, and reports findings in a fixed format.

    78k GitHub starsUsed in 4 repos~1.1k tokens
    DevelopmentAuto-check passed
  • Greploop

    onyx-dot-app/onyx

    Iteratively improves a PR (GitHub), MR (GitLab), or shelved changelist (Perforce) until Greptile gives it a 5/5 confidence score with zero unresolved comments.

    32k GitHub starsUsed in 4 repos~3.3k tokens
    DevelopmentAuto-check passed

More from ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code

All 44 skills in this repo
  • Audit

    ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code

    View audit logs, decision traces, and session history for AI transparency.

    601 GitHub stars~1.6k tokensUpdated 14 days ago
    Auto-check: notes
  • Bkend Auth

    ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code

    bkend.ai authentication — email/social login, JWT tokens, RBAC, session management.

    601 GitHub stars~937 tokensUpdated 14 days ago
    Auto-check: notes
  • Bkend Cookbook

    ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code

    bkend.ai project tutorials (todo to SaaS) and common error troubleshooting.

    601 GitHub stars~891 tokensUpdated 14 days ago
    Auto-check: notes
  • Bkend Quickstart

    ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code

    bkend.ai onboarding — MCP setup, resource hierarchy, tenant/user model, first project.

    601 GitHub stars~1.2k tokensUpdated 14 days ago
    Auto-check passed
  • Bkend Storage

    ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code

    bkend.ai file storage — upload (presigned URL), download (CDN), visibility levels, buckets.

    601 GitHub stars~901 tokensUpdated 14 days ago
    Auto-check: notes
  • Bkit

    ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code

    bkit plugin help - list available functions including /pdca (9-phase feature cycle), /sprint (8-phase feature container, v2.1.13), /control (Trust L0-L4 + SPRINTAUTORUNSCOPE), /bkit-explore, and 40+…

    601 GitHub stars~1.4k tokensUpdated 14 days ago
    Auto-check passed

Categories

Questions about Phase 8 Review

What does Phase 8 Review do?

Verify codebase quality — architecture consistency, convention compliance, gap analysis. Phase 8 Review is an agent skill from ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code. Verify codebase quality — architecture consistency, convention compliance, gap analysis.

When should I use Phase 8 Review?

Phase 8 Review fits situations like: development work in your project.

How do I install Phase 8 Review in Claude Code?

Run `npx skills add ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code --skill phase-8-review -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/phase-8-review in ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code) into .claude/skills/phase-8-review in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.

How do I install Phase 8 Review in Codex?

Run `npx skills add ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code --skill phase-8-review -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/phase-8-review in ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code) into .agents/skills/phase-8-review in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.

Can I use Phase 8 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 ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code --skill phase-8-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/phase-8-review, .gemini/skills/phase-8-review, .github/skills/phase-8-review and .opencode/skills/phase-8-review in your project.

What does Phase 8 Review need to run?

SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Phase 8 Review is instructions for the agent only. Its frontmatter pre-approves these tools: Read, Glob, Grep, LSP, Task.

Does Phase 8 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 Phase 8 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 Phase 8 Review use?

Phase 8 Review is published under the Apache-2.0 licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.

How many tokens does Phase 8 Review use?

About 3.7k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 15k 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 Phase 8 Review?

Skills that share tags, products or a category with Phase 8 Review: Vercel Composition Patterns (supabase/supabase, 111k stars), Finishing a Development Branch (obra/superpowers, 297k stars), Typescript Advanced Types (rolling-scopes/rsschool-app, 10k stars) and PR Babysitter (openinterpreter/openinterpreter, 69k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.

Who maintains Phase 8 Review?

ww-w-ai (a GitHub organization) maintains it in ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code, which has 601 GitHub stars. The repository holds 44 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on September 27, 2026.

Source: ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.