auto-review

Reviews changed code against TRUST 5 criteria with risk-tiered multi-provider analysis.

111|73|Updated Mar 20, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/autopus-ai/autopus-adk --skill auto-review-autopus-ai
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent▼
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: auto-review
Source: https://github.com/autopus-ai/autopus-adk/tree/main/.omp/skills/auto-review
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/autopus-ai/autopus-adk --skill auto-review-autopus-ai

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve? Code changes often ship without consistent review standards, leaving correctness, security, and complexity issues undetected until production. This Skill applies a structured TRUST 5 review (Tested, Readable, Unified, Secured, Trackable) to every diff with deterministic verdicts. ## Core Features & Use Cases - TRUST 5 Review: Evaluates changed code against coverage, naming, consistency, OWASP security, and commit conventions, producing APPROVE or REQUEST_CHANGES verdicts. - Risk-Tiered Multi-Provider Review: Routes low/medium risk changes to a single provider and high/critical changes to multi-provider dissent review, with degraded fallback tracking. - Findings Split and Repair Loop: Separates authoritative Correctness/Security findings from advisory Complexity findings, and feeds REQUEST_CHANGES checklists back into the autonomous fix loop with a retry budget of 2. - Use Case: After implementing an OAuth2 feature, run the review on the diff to receive severity-ordered security findings, UI design-context drift checks, and a decision receipt before merging. ## Quick Start Ask the agent to run /auto review on the current diff or a specific path such as /auto review HEAD~3..HEAD --risk-tier high.

Frequently Asked Questions about auto-review

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I review code changes with TRUST 5 criteria?▼

Run /auto review on a diff, file path, or commit range such as HEAD~3..HEAD. The skill evaluates Tested, Readable, Unified, Secured, and Trackable dimensions and returns an APPROVE or REQUEST_CHANGES verdict with severity-ordered findings.

How does risk-tiered code review work?▼

Low and medium risk changes use a single provider, while high and critical changes use multi-provider dissent review when available. If only one provider is installed, it falls back to single-provider mode and records the degraded evidence.

Can the review fix the issues it finds automatically?▼

The review itself is read-only and never modifies files. Inside an autonomous /auto go loop, REQUEST_CHANGES findings return to the fixer as a checklist, with repair, validation, and verification retried at most 2 times.

What happens when a critical security finding is detected?▼

An unresolved Critical security or correctness finding sets critical_veto=true, blocking APPROVE. A degraded or vetoed analysis cannot become APPROVE without an explicit audited override recorded in the orchestration receipt.

Does the review check UI and design consistency?▼

Yes, when the diff includes UI files it checks palette-role drift, typography hierarchy, component guardrails, layout regressions, and invented props against the design context. If no design baseline exists, it logs a non-error skip and continues.