本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

swift-code-review

Reviews Swift code for concurrency safety, error handling, memory management, and common mistakes. Use when reviewing .swift files for async/await patterns, actor isolation, Sendable conformance, or general Swift best practices.

existential-birds/beagle
インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル（5）

  • SKILL.md4.3 KB
  • references/common-mistakes.md3.7 KB
  • references/concurrency.md3.7 KB
  • references/error-handling.md3.6 KB
  • references/observable.md3.7 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。

Swift Code Review

Review Workflow

Follow this sequence in order. Do not emit findings until every Pass below is satisfied.

  1. Swift / toolchain baseline — Establish language and tooling context: Package.swift // swift-tools-version and any per-target Swift language version or swiftSettings in the manifest; for Xcode, SWIFT_VERSION (or equivalent) in project or target build settings; note if review is single-file only.
    Pass: You state a concrete Swift language version or mode (e.g. Swift 6 language mode, tools 5.10) before advice that depends on strict concurrency, migration-only syntax, or SDK availability.

  2. Read surrounding code — For each changed .swift file, read the full enclosing type, function, method, or property that contains the edits, not only the diff hunk.
    Pass: At least one full enclosing symbol (type or member) containing the change was read per changed file.

  3. Scope the checklist — Using Quick Reference, decide which Review Checklist rows and references apply; open those reference files; skip rows clearly unrelated to the diff.
    Pass: The review (or working notes) lists which checklist areas you applied, or marks areas N/A with a one-line reason tied to the diff (e.g. “no SwiftUI / @Observable in change”).

  4. Pre-report verification — Load and follow review-verification-protocol.
    Pass: That skill’s Hard gates (sequenced) are satisfied for each finding you will report (full symbol read, usage search before “unused”, caller checked before “missing handling”, severity calibrated, [FILE:LINE] proof).

Hard gates (same sequence, shorter)

StepObjective pass condition
1Swift version/mode (or explicit single-file limitation) recorded before version- or SDK-gated advice.
2Full enclosing symbol read per changed file, not diff-only.
3Checklist areas + references listed or N/A with diff-tied reason.
4review-verification-protocol completed for every reported issue.

Output format

Report findings as:

[FILE:LINE] ISSUE_TITLE
Severity: Critical | Major | Minor | Informational
Description of the issue and why it matters.

Quick Reference

Issue TypeReference
async/await, actors, Sendable, Taskreferences/concurrency.md
@Observable, @ObservationIgnored, @Bindablereferences/observable.md
throws, Result, try?, typed throwsreferences/error-handling.md
Force unwraps, retain cycles, namingreferences/common-mistakes.md

Review Checklist

  • No force unwraps (!) on runtime data (network, user input, files)
  • Closures stored as properties use [weak self]
  • Delegate properties are weak
  • Independent async operations use async let or TaskGroup
  • Long-running Tasks check Task.isCancelled
  • Actors have mutable state to protect (no stateless actors)
  • Sendable types are truly thread-safe (beware @unchecked)
  • Errors handled explicitly (no empty catch blocks)
  • Custom errors conform to LocalizedError with descriptive messages
  • Nested @Observable objects are also marked @Observable
  • @Bindable used for two-way bindings to Observable objects

When to Load References

  • Reviewing async/await, actors, or TaskGroups → concurrency.md
  • Reviewing @Observable or SwiftUI state → observable.md
  • Reviewing error handling or throws → error-handling.md
  • General Swift review → common-mistakes.md

Review Questions

  1. Are async operations that could run concurrently using async let?
  2. Could actor state change across suspension points (reentrancy bug)?
  3. Is @unchecked Sendable backed by actual synchronization?
  4. Are errors logged and presented with helpful context?
  5. Could any closure or delegate create a retain cycle?

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。

ログインしてレビューを書く

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

adr-decision-extraction

無料

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

adr-writing

無料

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

agent-architecture-analysis

無料

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

ai-elements

無料

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

app-intents-code-review

無料

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

artifact-analysis

無料

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