本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

phoenix-code-review

Reviews Phoenix code for controller patterns, context boundaries, routing, and plugs. Use when reviewing Phoenix apps, checking controllers, routers, or context modules.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(5)

  • SKILL.md3.4 KB
  • references/contexts.md2.6 KB
  • references/controllers.md2.6 KB
  • references/plugs.md3.0 KB
  • references/routing.md2.3 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Phoenix Code Review

Quick Reference

Issue TypeReference
Bounded contexts, Ecto integrationreferences/contexts.md
Actions, params, error handlingreferences/controllers.md
Pipelines, scopes, verified routesreferences/routing.md
Custom plugs, authenticationreferences/plugs.md

Review Checklist

Controllers

  • Business logic in contexts, not controllers
  • Controllers return proper HTTP status codes
  • Action clauses handle all expected patterns
  • Fallback controllers handle errors consistently

Contexts

  • Contexts are bounded by domain, not technical layer
  • Public functions have clear, domain-focused names
  • Changesets validate all user input
  • No Ecto queries in controllers

Routing

  • Verified routes (~p sigil) used, not string paths
  • Pipelines group related plugs
  • Resources use only needed actions
  • Scopes group related routes

Plugs

  • Authentication/authorization via plugs
  • Plugs are composable and single-purpose
  • Halt called after sending response in plugs

JSON APIs

  • Proper content negotiation
  • Consistent error response format
  • Pagination for list endpoints

Valid Patterns (Do NOT Flag)

  • Controller calling multiple contexts - Valid for orchestration
  • Inline Ecto query in context - Context owns its data access
  • Using action_fallback - Centralized error handling pattern
  • Multiple pipelines per route - Composition is intentional
  • Plug.Conn.halt/1 without send - May be handled by fallback

Context-Sensitive Rules

IssueFlag ONLY IF
Missing changeset validationField accepts user input AND no validation exists
Controller too largeMore than 7 actions OR actions > 20 lines
Missing authorizationRoute is not public AND no auth plug in pipeline

Gates (run in order; each step has a pass condition)

  1. Anchored evidence — For every planned finding, open the source and note file path + line number from that read (not from memory or diff snippets alone). Pass: each finding cites path:line that you opened.
  2. “Handled elsewhere” sweep — Before reporting “missing validation,” “missing auth,” or “wrong status,” search the router (pipelines/scopes), controller (action_fallback, plug), and relevant context for existing checks. Pass: you recorded whether handling exists elsewhere (yes + where, or no after search).
  3. Verification protocol — Load and apply review-verification-protocol for the issue type. Pass: that skill’s pre-report checks for that finding class are satisfied before you write the finding.
  4. Finding shape — Emit each issue as [FILE:LINE] ISSUE_TITLE with a one-line rationale tied to the cited code. Pass: every line matches that pattern.

Before Submitting Findings

Do not report until Gates above pass. For full anti-false-positive steps, follow review-verification-protocol.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Use when you need to mine a conversation, session transcript, or design discussion for architectural decisions before writing ADRs. Identifies problem-solution pairs, trade-off debates, technology choices, and explicit "[ADR]" tags. Triggers on "what decisions did we make", "extract decisions from this chat", "find the choices in our discussion", or "summarize architectural decisions". Also useful after long planning sessions to capture decisions that were made implicitly. Does NOT write ADR documents — use adr-writing or write-adr for that.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

existential-birds/beagle822026年9月16日 更新

Use when writing or formatting an ADR document using the MADR template, applying Definition of Done (E.C.A.D.R.) criteria, or verifying ADR completeness. Triggers on "write the ADR", "format as MADR", "check ADR quality", "mark gaps in ADR". Also triggers when a decision has been extracted and needs to become a document. Does NOT extract decisions from conversations (use adr-decision-extraction) or orchestrate the full extract-confirm-write workflow (use write-adr).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

existential-birds/beagle822026年9月16日 更新

Use when auditing an agent codebase against the 12-Factor Agents methodology, reviewing LLM-powered system architecture, or assessing agentic app compliance. Triggers on "analyze agent architecture", "12-factor audit", "how compliant is this agent", or "evaluate this LLM app". Also applies when comparing frameworks or planning agent improvements. Not for quick checklists — this performs deep per-factor codebase analysis with file-level evidence.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

existential-birds/beagle822026年9月16日 更新

Vercel AI Elements for workflow UI components. Use when building chat interfaces, displaying tool execution, showing reasoning/thinking, or creating job queues. Triggers on ai-elements, Queue, Confirmation, Tool, Reasoning, Shimmer, Loader, Message, Conversation, PromptInput.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

existential-birds/beagle822026年9月16日 更新

Reviews App Intents code for intent structure, entities, shortcuts, and parameters. Use when reviewing code with import AppIntents, @AppIntent, AppEntity, AppShortcutsProvider, or @Parameter.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

existential-birds/beagle822026年9月16日 更新

Use when the user wants a cited, structured read of local documents and project knowledge. Triggers on: "analyze these docs", "scan my project for context", "read the docs folder", "summarize what's in .beagle/concepts/", "extract context from docs/", "what's in this folder", "go read everything in X and tell me what's there". Also invoked programmatically by other beagle skills (prfaq-beagle Ignition, brainstorm-beagle reference points, strategy-interview context grounding) via the companion contract. Does NOT trigger on codebase lookups ("find this function", "search the repo"), web research (use web-research), LLM-as-judge evaluation (use llm-judge), or document editing (use humanize-beagle). Produces a written scan plan, parallel-subagent findings, and a cited synthesis report on disk — never inline prose, never unsourced claims.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

existential-birds/beagle822026年9月16日 更新

existential-birds のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する