skill: add mygo-api-repo-review skill.

2026-07-14 11:55:16 +08:00
parent 803f195af1
commit 5674fa2eb5
6 changed files with 192 additions and 0 deletions
@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
+# Review Report Template
+
+Write the report in the language requested by the user; otherwise match the language of the review request. Preserve source identifiers, commands, file paths, and code symbols exactly.
+
+Use category-based finding IDs:
+
+- `ARCH`: architecture and evolution
+- `SEC`: security
+- `REL`: resilience
+- `DATA`: data consistency
+- `PERF`: performance and scaling
+- `IMPL`: implementation correctness
+
+Number IDs within the report, for example `SEC-001`. Assign one primary category to each root cause.
+
+Use these severity levels independently of category:
+
+- `Critical`: a reachable issue with catastrophic impact, such as broad authorization compromise, widespread sensitive-data exposure, irreversible systemic data loss, or reliable total-service failure.
+- `High`: a realistic issue causing material authorization or ownership bypass, user-data exposure or corruption, service-wide outage, or a fundamental design failure that blocks supported behavior.
+- `Medium`: a material but contained correctness, consistency, resilience, scalability, or maintainability failure with a plausible trigger.
+- `Low`: a verified, bounded defect with limited impact. Do not use `Low` for style preferences or optional improvements.
+
+Sort findings by severity, then by impact within the same severity. Security is a category, not a severity; a security finding can have any severity.
+
+Use this structure:
+
+```markdown
+- Summary
+  - Mode: diff | main | full
+  - Target: all | <path/package/component>
+  - Baseline: <commit or none>
+  - Reviewed snapshot: <HEAD and workspace state>
+  - Verification: <build, vet, test, and format-check results>
+
+- Findings
+  - ID: <CATEGORY-NNN>
+  - Severity: Critical | High | Medium | Low
+  - Location: <filename:line>
+  - Analysis: <evidence, reachable causal path, and material impact>
+  - Recommendation: <root-cause repair direction>
+
+- Architecture drift
+  - <material differences between documented and implemented architecture, referencing finding IDs instead of duplicating analysis>
+
+- Documentation drift
+  - <documentation inaccuracies that can materially mislead implementation, operation, or review>
+
+- Unverified areas
+  - <unverified area, reason, and required validation>
+```
+
+If there are no qualifying findings, write `Findings: None`. Write `None` for any other empty section. Do not omit verification failures or review limitations.