receiving-code-review
Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation
- License 许可
- MIT
- 最近更新
- 2026-11-02
- Stars
- ★ 0
- Forks
- 0
01 前言 Front Matter
- name
- receiving-code-review
- description
- Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation
02 资源文件 2
- 参考文档DEEPENING.md2.5 KB
- 参考文档DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md2.6 KB
03 SKILL.md 正文
Code Review Reception
Overview
Code review requires technical evaluation, not emotional performance.
Core principle: Verify before implementing. Ask before assuming. Technical correctness over social comfort.
The Response Pattern
WHEN receiving code review feedback:
1. READ: Complete feedback without reacting
2. UNDERSTAND: Restate requirement in own words (or ask)
3. VERIFY: Check against codebase reality
4. EVALUATE: Technically sound for THIS codebase?
5. RESPOND: Technical acknowledgment or reasoned pushback
6. IMPLEMENT: One item at a time, test each
Forbidden Responses
NEVER:
- "You're absolutely right!" (explicit CLAUDE.md violation)
- "Great point!" / "Excellent feedback!" (performative)
- "Let me implement that now" (before verification)
INSTEAD:
- Restate the technical requirement
- Ask clarifying questions
- Push back with technical reasoning if wrong
- Just start working (actions > words)
Handling Unclear Feedback
IF any item is unclear:
STOP - do not implement anything yet
ASK for clarification on unclear items
WHY: Items may be related. Partial understanding = wrong implementation.
Example:
your human partner: "Fix 1-6"
You understand 1,2,3,6. Unclear on 4,5.
WRONG: Implement 1,2,3,6 now, ask about 4,5 later
RIGHT: "I understand items 1,2,3,6. Need clarification on 4 and 5 before proceeding."
Source-Specific Handling
From your human partner
- Trusted - implement after understanding
From External Reviewers
YAGNI Check for "Professional" Features
Implementation Order
When To Push Back
Acknowledging Correct Feedback
Gracefully Correcting Your Pushback
Common Mistakes
04 同仓库更多 Skills
clarify-requirements
Resolve genuine pre-execution ambiguity by scanning repo context, generating 1-6 grounded options, and asking 1-3 focused questions via AskUserQuestion. NOT for mid-task use (injection risk); NOT when the goal is already unambiguous; use to disambiguate vague prompts before any file edits.
openmm-md
Run FREE, open-source, Windows-native GPU molecular dynamics via the openmm-md MCP (OpenMM + CUDA on the local NVIDIA GPU). Use for protein / protein-ligand MD when you want a free stack or are on Windows without a Schrodinger license. Covers the full workflow (prepare, solvate, minimize, equilibrate, production, analyze, mmgbsa) AND an honest decision guide vs Schrodinger Desmond, including how to run Desmond legitimately on Linux or a cloud GPU with a real license. This is a deliberately LESSER free alternative and does NOT replace the schrodinger MCP tools. Do NOT use it to pick a free tool when a validated FEP+, WaterMap, IFD-MD, or Prime MM-GBSA result is actually required.
visual-review
Take screenshots of web pages and UI using Playwright for visual review and iteration
status
Diagnostic status report — shows metaswarm installation state, project setup, and potential issues
start
Use when starting work on any task, when the user mentions metaswarm, or when the user wants to begin tracked development work
setup
Interactive project setup — detects your project, configures metaswarm, writes project-local files