{"id":"f6c5b632-0caf-4834-9cde-523cb7efc1da","shortId":"pW6SGM","kind":"skill","title":"receiving-code-review","tagline":"Assesses and responds to incoming code review feedback on PRs (reviewer comments, requested changes), especially when suggestions are unclear, technically questionable, or scope-expanding. Use before implementing review suggestions to align on intent and keep changes minimal.","description":"# Code Review Reception\n\n## Overview\n\nCode review requires technical evaluation, not emotional performance.\n\n**Core principle:** Verify before implementing. Ask before assuming. Technical correctness over social comfort.\n\n## When NOT to Use\n\n- Simple, unambiguous feedback you fully understand\n- Direct requests from your human partner with clear intent\n- When explicitly asked to \"just implement this\"\n- Trivial corrections (typos, formatting) that need no verification\n\n## The Response Pattern\n\n```text\nWHEN receiving code review feedback:\n\n1. READ: Complete feedback without reacting\n2. UNDERSTAND: Restate requirement in own words (or ask)\n3. VERIFY: Check against codebase reality\n4. EVALUATE: Technically sound for THIS codebase?\n5. RESPOND: Technical acknowledgment or reasoned pushback\n6. IMPLEMENT: One item at a time, test each\n```\n\n## Forbidden Responses\n\n**NEVER:**\n- \"You're absolutely right!\" (performative; violates anti-sycophancy norms)\n- \"Great point!\" / \"Excellent feedback!\" (performative)\n- \"Let me implement that now\" (before verification)\n\n**INSTEAD:**\n- Restate the technical requirement\n- Ask clarifying questions\n- Push back with technical reasoning if wrong\n- Just start working (actions > words)\n\n## Handling Unclear Feedback\n\n```text\nIF any item is unclear:\n  STOP - do not implement anything yet\n  ASK for clarification on unclear items\n\nWHY: Items may be related. Partial understanding = wrong implementation.\n```\n\n**Example:**\n```text\nyour human partner: \"Fix 1-6\"\nYou understand 1,2,3,6. Unclear on 4,5.\n\n❌ WRONG: Implement 1,2,3,6 now, ask about 4,5 later\n✅ RIGHT: \"I understand items 1,2,3,6. Need clarification on 4 and 5 before proceeding.\"\n```\n\n## Source-Specific Handling\n\n### From your human partner\n- **Trusted** - implement after understanding\n- **Still ask** if scope unclear\n- **No performative agreement**\n- **Skip to action** or technical acknowledgment\n\n### From External Reviewers\n\n```text\nBEFORE implementing:\n  1. Check: Technically correct for THIS codebase?\n  2. Check: Breaks existing functionality?\n  3. Check: Reason for current implementation?\n  4. Check: Works on all platforms/versions?\n  5. Check: Does reviewer understand full context?\n\nIF suggestion seems wrong:\n  Push back with technical reasoning\n\nIF can't easily verify:\n  Say so: \"I can't verify this without [X]. Should I [investigate/ask/proceed]?\"\n\nIF conflicts with your human partner's prior decisions:\n  Stop and discuss with your human partner first\n```\n\n**Principle:** External feedback warrants skepticism but thorough checking.\n\n## YAGNI Check for \"Professional\" Features\n\n```text\nIF reviewer suggests \"implementing properly\":\n  grep codebase for actual usage\n\n  IF unused: \"This endpoint isn't called. Remove it (YAGNI)?\"\n  IF used: Then implement properly\n```\n\n**Principle:** If a feature isn't needed, don't add it—regardless of who suggests it.\n\n## Implementation Order\n\n```text\nFOR multi-item feedback:\n  1. Clarify anything unclear FIRST\n  2. Then implement in this order:\n     - Blocking issues (breaks, security)\n     - Simple fixes (typos, imports)\n     - Complex fixes (refactoring, logic)\n  3. Test each fix individually\n  4. Verify no regressions\n```\n\n## When To Push Back\n\nPush back when:\n- Suggestion breaks existing functionality\n- Reviewer lacks full context\n- Violates YAGNI (unused feature)\n- Technically incorrect for this stack\n- Legacy/compatibility reasons exist\n- Conflicts with your human partner's architectural decisions\n\n**How to push back:**\n- Use technical reasoning, not defensiveness\n- Ask specific questions\n- Reference working tests/code\n- Involve your human partner if architectural\n\n## Acknowledging Correct Feedback\n\nWhen feedback IS correct:\n```text\n✅ \"Fixed. [Brief description of what changed]\"\n✅ \"Good catch - [specific issue]. Fixed in [location].\"\n✅ [Just fix it and show in the code]\n```\n\n(See Forbidden Responses above for what NOT to say)\n\n**Why no thanks:** Actions speak. The code itself shows you heard the feedback.\n\n## Gracefully Correcting Your Pushback\n\nIf you pushed back and were wrong:\n```text\n✅ \"You were right - I checked [X] and it does [Y]. Implementing now.\"\n✅ \"Verified this and you're correct. My initial understanding was wrong because [reason]. Fixing.\"\n\n❌ Long apology\n❌ Defending why you pushed back\n❌ Over-explaining\n```\n\nState the correction factually and move on.\n\n## Common Mistakes\n\n| Mistake | Fix |\n|---------|-----|\n| Performative agreement | State requirement or just act |\n| Blind implementation | Verify against codebase first |\n| Batch without testing | One at a time, test each |\n| Assuming reviewer is right | Check if breaks things |\n| Avoiding pushback | Technical correctness > comfort |\n| Partial implementation | Clarify all items first |\n| Can't verify, proceed anyway | State limitation, ask for direction |\n\n## Real Examples\n\n**Performative Agreement (Bad):**\n```text\nReviewer: \"Remove legacy code\"\n❌ \"You're absolutely right! Let me remove that...\"\n```\n\n**Technical Verification (Good):**\n```text\nReviewer: \"Remove legacy code\"\n✅ \"Checking... build target is 10.15+, this API needs 13+. Need legacy for backward compat. Current impl has wrong bundle ID - fix it or drop pre-13 support?\"\n```\n\n**YAGNI (Good):**\n```text\nReviewer: \"Implement proper metrics tracking with database, date filters, CSV export\"\n✅ \"Grepped codebase - nothing calls this endpoint. Remove it (YAGNI)? Or is there usage I'm missing?\"\n```\n\n**Unclear Item (Good):**\n```text\nyour human partner: \"Fix items 1-6\"\nYou understand 1,2,3,6. Unclear on 4,5.\n✅ \"Understand 1,2,3,6. Need clarification on 4 and 5 before implementing.\"\n```\n\n## The Bottom Line\n\n**External feedback = suggestions to evaluate, not orders to follow.**\n\nVerify. Question. Then implement.\n\nNo performative agreement. Technical rigor always.","tags":["receiving","code","review","agent","skills","library","codingcossack","agent-framework","agent-skills","agent-system","agent-workflow","agentic-workflow"],"capabilities":["skill","source-codingcossack","skill-receiving-code-review","topic-agent-framework","topic-agent-skills","topic-agent-system","topic-agent-workflow","topic-agentic-workflow","topic-ai-agents","topic-anthropic","topic-claude","topic-claude-code","topic-claude-skills","topic-claude-skills-hub","topic-claude-skills-libary"],"categories":["agent-skills-library"],"synonyms":[],"warnings":[],"endpointUrl":"https://skills.sh/CodingCossack/agent-skills-library/receiving-code-review","protocol":"skill","transport":"skills-sh","auth":{"type":"none","details":{"cli":"npx skills add CodingCossack/agent-skills-library","source_repo":"https://github.com/CodingCossack/agent-skills-library","install_from":"skills.sh"}},"qualityScore":"0.458","qualityRationale":"deterministic score 0.46 from registry signals: · indexed on github topic:agent-skills · 17 github stars · SKILL.md body (5,792 chars)","verified":false,"liveness":"unknown","lastLivenessCheck":null,"agentReviews":{"count":0,"score_avg":null,"cost_usd_avg":null,"success_rate":null,"latency_p50_ms":null,"narrative_summary":null,"summary_updated_at":null},"enrichmentModel":"deterministic:skill-github:v1","enrichmentVersion":1,"enrichedAt":"2026-04-23T07:01:19.373Z","embedding":null,"createdAt":"2026-04-18T23:06:37.481Z","updatedAt":"2026-04-23T07:01:19.373Z","lastSeenAt":"2026-04-23T07:01:19.373Z","tsv":"'-13':745 '-6':237,787 '1':111,236,240,250,264,308,445,786,790,799 '10.15':724 '13':728 '2':117,241,251,265,315,450,791,800 '3':126,242,252,266,320,468,792,801 '4':132,246,257,271,326,473,796,806 '5':139,247,258,273,332,797,808 '6':146,243,253,267,793,802 'absolut':160,706 'acknowledg':142,301,533 'act':649 'action':198,298,574 'actual':404 'add':430 'agreement':295,644,697,829 'align':36 'alway':832 'anti':165 'anti-sycoph':164 'anyth':213,447 'anyway':688 'api':726 'apolog':623 'architectur':510,532 'ask':60,89,125,185,215,255,289,521,691 'assess':5 'assum':62,665 'avoid':673 'back':189,344,480,482,515,591,628 'backward':732 'bad':698 'batch':656 'blind':650 'block':456 'bottom':812 'break':317,458,485,671 'brief':542 'build':721 'bundl':738 'call':412,764 'catch':548 'chang':18,41,546 'check':128,309,316,321,327,333,389,391,600,669,720 'clarif':217,269,804 'clarifi':186,446,680 'clear':85 'code':3,10,43,47,108,561,577,703,719 'codebas':130,138,314,402,654,762 'comfort':67,677 'comment':16 'common':639 'compat':733 'complet':113 'complex':464 'conflict':366,504 'context':338,491 'core':55 'correct':64,95,311,534,539,585,613,634,676 'csv':759 'current':324,734 'databas':756 'date':757 'decis':373,511 'defend':624 'defens':520 'descript':543 'direct':78,693 'discuss':376 'drop':743 'easili':351 'emot':53 'endpoint':409,766 'especi':19 'evalu':51,133,818 'exampl':230,695 'excel':170 'exist':318,486,503 'expand':29 'explain':631 'explicit':88 'export':760 'extern':303,383,814 'factual':635 'featur':394,424,495 'feedback':12,74,110,114,171,202,384,444,535,537,583,815 'filter':758 'first':381,449,655,683 'fix':235,461,465,471,541,551,555,621,642,740,784 'follow':822 'forbidden':155,563 'format':97 'full':337,490 'fulli':76 'function':319,487 'good':547,714,748,779 'grace':584 'great':168 'grep':401,761 'handl':200,279 'heard':581 'human':82,233,282,369,379,507,529,782 'id':739 'impl':735 'implement':32,59,92,147,175,212,229,249,285,307,325,399,419,437,452,606,651,679,751,810,826 'import':463 'incom':9 'incorrect':497 'individu':472 'initi':615 'instead':180 'intent':38,86 'investigate/ask/proceed':364 'involv':527 'isn':410,425 'issu':457,550 'item':149,206,220,222,263,443,682,778,785 'keep':40 'lack':489 'later':259 'legaci':702,718,730 'legacy/compatibility':501 'let':173,708 'limit':690 'line':813 'locat':553 'logic':467 'long':622 'm':775 'may':223 'metric':753 'minim':42 'miss':776 'mistak':640,641 'move':637 'multi':442 'multi-item':441 'need':99,268,427,727,729,803 'never':157 'norm':167 'noth':763 'one':148,659 'order':438,455,820 'over-explain':629 'overview':46 'partial':226,678 'partner':83,234,283,370,380,508,530,783 'pattern':104 'perform':54,162,172,294,643,696,828 'platforms/versions':331 'point':169 'pre':744 'principl':56,382,421 'prior':372 'proceed':275,687 'profession':393 'proper':400,420,752 'prs':14 'push':188,343,479,481,514,590,627 'pushback':145,587,674 'question':25,187,523,824 're':159,612,705 'react':116 'read':112 'real':694 'realiti':131 'reason':144,192,322,347,502,518,620 'receiv':2,107 'receiving-code-review':1 'recept':45 'refactor':466 'refer':524 'regardless':432 'regress':476 'relat':225 'remov':413,701,710,717,767 'request':17,79 'requir':49,120,184,646 'respond':7,140 'respons':103,156,564 'restat':119,181 'review':4,11,15,33,44,48,109,304,335,397,488,666,700,716,750 'right':161,260,598,668,707 'rigor':831 'say':353,570 'scope':28,291 'scope-expand':27 'secur':459 'see':562 'seem':341 'show':558,579 'simpl':72,460 'skeptic':386 'skill' 'skill-receiving-code-review' 'skip':296 'social':66 'sound':135 'sourc':277 'source-codingcossack' 'source-specif':276 'speak':575 'specif':278,522,549 'stack':500 'start':196 'state':632,645,689 'still':288 'stop':209,374 'suggest':21,34,340,398,435,484,816 'support':746 'sycoph':166 'target':722 'technic':24,50,63,134,141,183,191,300,310,346,496,517,675,712,830 'test':153,469,658,663 'tests/code':526 'text':105,203,231,305,395,439,540,595,699,715,749,780 'thank':573 'thing':672 'thorough':388 'time':152,662 'topic-agent-framework' 'topic-agent-skills' 'topic-agent-system' 'topic-agent-workflow' 'topic-agentic-workflow' 'topic-ai-agents' 'topic-anthropic' 'topic-claude' 'topic-claude-code' 'topic-claude-skills' 'topic-claude-skills-hub' 'topic-claude-skills-libary' 'track':754 'trivial':94 'trust':284 'typo':96,462 'unambigu':73 'unclear':23,201,208,219,244,292,448,777,794 'understand':77,118,227,239,262,287,336,616,789,798 'unus':407,494 'usag':405,773 'use':30,71,417,516 'verif':101,179,713 'verifi':57,127,352,358,474,608,652,686,823 'violat':163,492 'warrant':385 'without':115,360,657 'word':123,199 'work':197,328,525 'wrong':194,228,248,342,594,618,737 'x':361,601 'y':605 'yagni':390,415,493,747,769 'yet':214","prices":[{"id":"390fe4dc-20f0-416d-bccf-087083e0de5e","listingId":"f6c5b632-0caf-4834-9cde-523cb7efc1da","amountUsd":"0","unit":"free","nativeCurrency":null,"nativeAmount":null,"chain":null,"payTo":null,"paymentMethod":"skill-free","isPrimary":true,"details":{"org":"CodingCossack","category":"agent-skills-library","install_from":"skills.sh"},"createdAt":"2026-04-18T23:06:37.481Z"}],"sources":[{"listingId":"f6c5b632-0caf-4834-9cde-523cb7efc1da","source":"github","sourceId":"CodingCossack/agent-skills-library/receiving-code-review","sourceUrl":"https://github.com/CodingCossack/agent-skills-library/tree/main/skills/receiving-code-review","isPrimary":false,"firstSeenAt":"2026-04-18T23:06:37.481Z","lastSeenAt":"2026-04-23T07:01:19.373Z"}],"details":{"listingId":"f6c5b632-0caf-4834-9cde-523cb7efc1da","quickStartSnippet":null,"exampleRequest":null,"exampleResponse":null,"schema":null,"openapiUrl":null,"agentsTxtUrl":null,"citations":[],"useCases":[],"bestFor":[],"notFor":[],"kindDetails":{"org":"CodingCossack","slug":"receiving-code-review","github":{"repo":"CodingCossack/agent-skills-library","stars":17,"topics":["agent-framework","agent-skills","agent-system","agent-workflow","agentic-workflow","ai-agents","anthropic","claude","claude-code","claude-skills","claude-skills-hub","claude-skills-libary","code-review","codex","context-engineering","debugging","developer-workflow"],"license":null,"html_url":"https://github.com/CodingCossack/agent-skills-library","pushed_at":"2026-01-03T20:02:38Z","description":"Coding agent skills library for programming workflows | Claude Skills, Codex Skills | Forked from obra/superpower","skill_md_sha":"a3777f416c86e5e52a0523822e86fb4fd06491ff","skill_md_path":"skills/receiving-code-review/SKILL.md","default_branch":"main","skill_tree_url":"https://github.com/CodingCossack/agent-skills-library/tree/main/skills/receiving-code-review"},"layout":"multi","source":"github","category":"agent-skills-library","frontmatter":{"name":"receiving-code-review","description":"Assesses and responds to incoming code review feedback on PRs (reviewer comments, requested changes), especially when suggestions are unclear, technically questionable, or scope-expanding. Use before implementing review suggestions to align on intent and keep changes minimal."},"skills_sh_url":"https://skills.sh/CodingCossack/agent-skills-library/receiving-code-review"},"updatedAt":"2026-04-23T07:01:19.373Z"}}