performance-testing-review-ai-review

Reviews pull requests using static analysis tools and LLMs to detect security, performance, and architecture issues.

2|Updated Jun 16, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/monang404/lunawave --skill performance-testing-review-ai-review-monang404
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent▼
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: performance-testing-review-ai-review
Source: https://github.com/monang404/lunawave/tree/main/.agent/skills/performance-testing-review-ai-review
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/monang404/lunawave --skill performance-testing-review-ai-review-monang404

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill requires anthropic.

What problem does it solve? Manual code review is slow and inconsistent, often missing security vulnerabilities, performance regressions, and architectural violations. This Skill automates multi-layered pull request analysis by combining static analysis tools with LLM-based reasoning, producing structured, severity-classified review comments. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Multi-Tool Static Analysis: Orchestrates CodeQL, SonarQube, Semgrep, Snyk, and TruffleHog to detect vulnerabilities, code smells, secrets, and supply chain risks. - AI-Assisted Review: Routes pull requests to appropriate LLMs (GPT-4o, Claude Sonnet, Qodo) based on size, security sensitivity, and coverage gaps, generating JSON-formatted findings with CWE identifiers and fix examples. - CI/CD Integration: Provides a GitHub Actions workflow that posts inline review comments, enforces quality gates on critical issues, and requests changes automatically. - Use Case: A team opens a pull request touching authentication code; the Skill runs Semgrep and CodeQL, sends the diff plus static results to Claude for deep security analysis, and posts line-referenced comments flagging a SQL injection with a parameterized-query fix. ## Quick Start Ask the AI to review the current pull request for security, performance, and architecture issues and generate severity-classified comments with fix examples.

Frequently Asked Questions about performance-testing-review-ai-review

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I automate code review in GitHub Actions?▼

Add a workflow triggered on pull_request events that runs SonarQube, CodeQL, and Semgrep scans, then passes the diff and SARIF results to an LLM review script. The script posts inline comments via the GitHub API and fails the quality gate when critical issues exist.

What static analysis tools work for pull request security review?▼

CodeQL performs deep vulnerability analysis like SQL injection and XSS, Semgrep enforces organization-specific rules, and TruffleHog detects leaked secrets. Combining them with Snyk or Dependabot covers supply chain vulnerabilities.

Which LLM should I use for automated code review?▼

Use fast models like GPT-4o-mini or Claude Haiku for small diffs under 200 lines, and Claude Sonnet or GPT-4.5 for deep reasoning on large or security-sensitive changes. Qodo suits multi-language review and test generation.

Can AI code review detect N+1 query performance problems?▼

Yes, AST-based analysis can detect database calls inside loops and flag them as N+1 query issues with HIGH severity. The suggested fix is eager loading with JOINs or batch loading, and benchmark comparison against baseline metrics catches regressions.

When should a pull request skip automated AI review?▼

Route to human review when a PR changes more than 50 files or 1000 lines, since automation cannot reliably assess very large changes. Security-sensitive or auth-affecting changes should use a dedicated security-focused model with low temperature.