# Code Review > Realiza una revisión arquitectónica y de calidad de un archivo o conjunto de archivos, evaluando estándares, principios SOLID, testabilidad y rendimiento. Fuente: https://skillsagentes.com/skills/donchitos/claude-code-game-studios/code-review Markdown: https://skillsagentes.com/skills/donchitos/claude-code-game-studios/code-review.md Repositorio: https://github.com/Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios Autor: Donchitos Licencia: MIT Actualizado: hace 3 meses Coste de contexto: 54 tok instalada, 1.9k tok al activarse, 1.9k tok con todos los archivos del bundle Bundle: 1 archivo, 7 KB Permisos que pide: read, glob, grep, bash, task, askuserquestion ## Instalación Un skill son archivos markdown: los mismos archivos valen para cualquier agente y lo único que cambia es el directorio de destino, es decir la bandera `--agent`. Añade `-g` para instalarlo en todos los proyectos de la máquina. ```bash # Claude Code npx -y skills add Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill code-review --agent claude-code # Cursor npx -y skills add Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill code-review --agent cursor # Codex npx -y skills add Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill code-review --agent codex # Gemini CLI npx -y skills add Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill code-review --agent gemini # Windsurf npx -y skills add Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill code-review --agent windsurf # Cline npx -y skills add Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill code-review --agent cline ``` ## Qué hace - Reads target files and CLAUDE.md coding standards - Checks ADR compliance by tracing ADR references and classifying deviations - Evaluates standards, architecture, SOLID, and game-specific concerns - Spawns engine specialists and qa-tester in parallel for reviews - Outputs a structured verdict: APPROVED / APPROVED WITH SUGGESTIONS / CHANGES REQUIRED ## Cuándo usarla - Se necesita una revisión arquitectónica y de calidad de un archivo o conjunto de archivos de código - Se quiere verificar cumplimiento con ADRs, estándares de codificación y principios SOLID antes de aprobar una historia ## Qué la activa - "/code-review src/combat/attack.gd" - "Revisa la arquitectura de este sistema de combate" - "/code-review src/ui/hud.gd production/epics/ui/story-003.md" ## Antes de instalar - Requiere CLAUDE.md y opcionalmente .claude/docs/technical-preferences.md configurado con especialistas de motor. - runs shell commands ## Archivos - SKILL.md — 7 KB ## SKILL.md Reproducido tal cual desde Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios bajo MIT. Esta sección es el documento original y está en inglés. ## Phase 1: Load Target Files Read the target file(s) in full. Read CLAUDE.md for project coding standards. --- ## Phase 2: Identify Engine Specialists Read `.claude/docs/technical-preferences.md`, section `## Engine Specialists`. Note: - The **Primary** specialist (used for architecture and broad engine concerns) - The **Language/Code Specialist** (used when reviewing the project's primary language files) - The **Shader Specialist** (used when reviewing shader files) - The **UI Specialist** (used when reviewing UI code) If the section reads `[TO BE CONFIGURED]`, no engine is pinned — skip engine specialist steps. --- ## Phase 3: ADR Compliance Check **Argument:** `/code-review [file(s)]` may optionally include a story file path as the last argument (e.g., `/code-review src/combat/attack.gd production/epics/combat/story-001.md`). If a story path is provided, read it to extract the governing ADR reference. Search for ADR references in, in priority order: 1. The story file (if provided as argument) 2. Header comments at the top of the implementation files 3. Commit messages referencing these files (`git log --oneline -- [file]`) Look for patterns like `ADR-NNN` or `docs/architecture/ADR-`. If no ADR references found, note: "No ADR references found — ADR compliance check skipped. For full ADR compliance review, provide the story path: `/code-review [files] [story-path]`." For each referenced ADR: read the file, extract the **Decision** and **Consequences** sections, then classify any deviation: - **ARCHITECTURAL VIOLATION** (BLOCKING): Uses a pattern explicitly rejected in the ADR - **ADR DRIFT** (WARNING): Meaningfully diverges from the chosen approach without using a forbidden pattern - **MINOR DEVIATION** (INFO): Small difference from ADR guidance that doesn't affect overall architecture --- ## Phase 4: Standards Compliance Identify the system category (engine, gameplay, AI, networking, UI, tools) and evaluate: - [ ] Public methods and classes have doc comments - [ ] Cyclomatic complexity under 10 per method - [ ] No method exceeds 40 lines (excluding data declarations) - [ ] Dependencies are injected (no static singletons for game state) - [ ] Configuration values loaded from data files - [ ] Systems expose interfaces (not concrete class dependencies) --- ## Phase 5: Architecture and SOLID **Architecture:** - [ ] Correct dependency direction (engine <- gameplay, not reverse) - [ ] No circular dependencies between modules - [ ] Proper layer separation (UI does not own game state) - [ ] Events/signals used for cross-system communication - [ ] Consistent with established patterns in the codebase **SOLID:** - [ ] Single Responsibility: Each class has one reason to change - [ ] Open/Closed: Extendable without modification - [ ] Liskov Substitution: Subtypes substitutable for base types - [ ] Interface Segregation: No fat interfaces - [ ] Dependency Inversion: Depends on abstractions, not concretions --- ## Phase 6: Game-Specific Concerns - [ ] Frame-rate independence (delta time usage) - [ ] No allocations in hot paths (update loops) - [ ] Proper null/empty state handling - [ ] Thread safety where required - [ ] Resource cleanup (no leaks) --- ## Phase 7: Specialist Reviews (Parallel) Spawn all applicable specialists simultaneously via Task — do not wait for one before starting the next. ### Engine Specialists If an engine is configured, determine which specialist applies to each file and spawn in parallel: - Primary language files (`.gd`, `.cs`, `.cpp`) → Language/Code Specialist - Shader files (`.gdshader`, `.hlsl`, shader graph) → Shader Specialist - UI screen/widget code → UI Specialist - Cross-cutting or unclear → Primary Specialist Also spawn the **Primary Specialist** for any file touching engine architecture (scene structure, node hierarchy, lifecycle hooks). ### QA Testability Review For Logic and Integration stories, also spawn `qa-tester` via Task in parallel with the engine specialists. Pass: - The implementation files being reviewed - The story's `## QA Test Cases` section (the pre-written test specs from qa-lead) - The story's `## Acceptance Criteria` Ask the qa-tester to evaluate: - [ ] Are all test hooks and interfaces exposed (not hidden behind private/internal access)? - [ ] Do the QA test cases from the story's `## QA Test Cases` section map to testable code paths? - [ ] Are any acceptance criteria untestable as implemented (e.g., hardcoded values, no seam for injection)? - [ ] Does the implementation introduce any new edge cases not covered by the existing QA test cases? - [ ] Are there any observable side effects that should have a test but don't? For Visual/Feel and UI stories: qa-tester reviews whether the manual verification steps in `## QA Test Cases` are achievable with the implementation as written — e.g., "is the state the manual checker needs to reach actually reachable?" Collect all specialist findings before producing output. --- ## Phase 8: Output Review ``` ## Code Review: [File/System Name] ### Engine Specialist Findings: [N/A — no engine configured / CLEAN / ISSUES FOUND] [Findings from engine specialist(s), or "No engine configured." if skipped] ### Testability: [N/A — Visual/Feel or Config story / TESTABLE / GAPS / BLOCKING] [qa-tester findings: test hooks, coverage gaps, untestable paths, new edge cases] [If BLOCKING: implementation must expose [X] before tests in ## QA Test Cases can run] ### ADR Compliance: [NO ADRS FOUND / COMPLIANT / DRIFT / VIOLATION] [List each ADR checked, result, and any deviations with severity] ### Standards Compliance: [X/6 passing] [List failures with line references] ### Architecture: [CLEAN / MINOR ISSUES / VIOLATIONS FOUND] [List specific architectural concerns] ### SOLID: [COMPLIANT / ISSUES FOUND] [List specific violations] ### Game-Specific Concerns [List game development specific issues] ### Positive Observations [What is done well -- always include this section] ### Required Changes [Must-fix items before approval — ARCHITECTURAL VIOLATIONs always appear here] ### Suggestions [Nice-to-have improvements] ### Verdict: [APPROVED / APPROVED WITH SUGGESTIONS / CHANGES REQUIRED] ``` This skill is read-only — no files are written. --- ## Phase 9: Next Steps Use `AskUserQuestion`: - Prompt: "Code review complete — verdict: [APPROVED / CHANGES REQUIRED / MAJOR REVISION]. How would you like to proceed?" - Options (adjust based on verdict): - If APPROVED: - `[A] Run /story-done to mark the story complete` - `[B] Stop here` - If CHANGES REQUIRED or MAJOR REVISION: - `[A] Fix the issues and re-run /code-review` - `[B] Run /story-done anyway with noted exceptions` - `[C] Stop here` If an ARCHITECTURAL VIOLATION is found: - If the violation contradicts an **existing ADR**: fix the implementation to comply with `docs/architecture/[adr-file].md`. If the design has legitimately changed, run `/architecture-decision` to formally *revise* the existing ADR — do not create a competing one. - If **no ADR exists** for the pattern that was violated: run `/architecture-decision` to document the correct approach before fixing the code. ## Dónde encaja - Categoría: [Testing y QA](https://skillsagentes.com/categorias/testing-qa.md) — Flujos de testing unitario, de integración y end-to-end. - Creador: [Donchitos](https://skillsagentes.com/creators/donchitos.md) — 73 skills en el directorio - [Todas las skills](https://skillsagentes.com/skills.md) - [Ranking de instalaciones](https://skillsagentes.com/ranking.md) ## Otras skills del mismo repositorio - [Team Qa](https://skillsagentes.com/skills/donchitos/claude-code-game-studios/team-qa.md): Orquesta al equipo de QA (qa-lead y qa-tester) para producir un paquete completo de QA: plan de pruebas, smoke check, casos de prueba, ejecución manual y reporte de sign-off. - [Consistency Check](https://skillsagentes.com/skills/donchitos/claude-code-game-studios/consistency-check.md): Compara todos los GDDs contra el registro de entidades para detectar inconsistencias entre documentos: mismo stat, ítem o fórmula con valores distintos, usando un enfoque grep-first. - [Create Architecture](https://skillsagentes.com/skills/donchitos/claude-code-game-studios/create-architecture.md): Redacción guiada, sección por sección, del documento de arquitectura maestro del juego, consciente de la versión del motor y de sus posibles brechas de conocimiento. - [Day One Patch](https://skillsagentes.com/skills/donchitos/claude-code-game-studios/day-one-patch.md): Prepara un patch day-one para el lanzamiento de un juego: define alcance, prioriza, implementa y valida con un QA gate ligero, como un mini-sprint con plan de rollback. - [Hotfix](https://skillsagentes.com/skills/donchitos/claude-code-game-studios/hotfix.md): Flujo de arreglo urgente que se salta el proceso normal de sprint pero deja rastro de auditoría completo: crea rama hotfix, registra aprobaciones y asegura el backport correcto. --- Skills Agentes · [Índice de páginas en markdown](https://skillsagentes.com/sitemap.md) · [Inicio](https://skillsagentes.com/index.md)