Chalk Labs
Need help deploying ai-full-code-review?
Chalk Labs sets up agents like this inside real teams: connected to your tools, tested on your data, with a human in the loop where it matters.
Install
Works with Claude Code, Claude apps, Codex, Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot, VS Code, OpenCode, Goose, Windsurf. Read the repository before you give any tool access to your data.
npx agentmarket install skill/cristiano-pacheco-ai-full-code-review
Asks which of your tools to add it to (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, VS Code, Windsurf, Gemini CLI, Claude Desktop) and shows the change first. See https://agentmart.dev/cli.
Get the weekly diff
The weekly diff: one email a week with new agent tools, notable updates and grade changes, plus security alerts for tools you follow. Double opt-in, one-click unsubscribe.
About
Reviews
Write a reviewNo reviews yet. Installed it? Reviews come from verified installers only. How reviews work
Permissions
What this skill can do and what it asks for, from its SKILL.md and code. Checked Nov 1, 2026.
- Tools
- No tools found
- Secrets
- None asked for
- Install scripts
- None found
Network hosts it talks to 1
codeload.github.com· found in install command
Files it touches
~/.claude/skills/ai-full-code-review
What's inside
- Skill name
ai-full-code-review- Description
- Review a branch diff for production risk.
- License
- MIT
- Instructions
- 71 lines in SKILL.md · view on GitHub
Files (2)
- SKILL.md
- code-review-template.md · references/
SKILL.md (first lines)
Act as a **Principal Backend Engineer** reviewing this code to prevent production incidents. Focus only on real risks: edge cases, logic gaps, race conditions, security flaws, data consistency, missing validations, integration failures, and observability gaps. Skip cosmetic, stylistic, or low-impact comments. ## What to review Inspect the current branch against `main`: - `git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD` - `git diff main...HEAD --stat` - `git diff main...HEAD` If on `main`, stop and report. ## For each finding, provide 1. 🚨 **Issue** — the concrete problem 2. ⚠️ **Why it matters** — production impact 3. 🧪 **Failure scenario** — a realistic example 4. ✅ **Fix** — a clear mitigation, preferring proven patterns when applicable (idempotency, retries with backoff, sagas, outbox/inbox, optimistic locking, deduplication, rate limiting) If no relevant risks are found, say so explicitly. Use `references/code-review-template.md` as the output format. ## Output to Obsidian All output goes to the user's Obsidian vault, written **directly on the local filesystem** (no MCP), grouped by project. **Vault root:** `$OBSIDIAN_AI_VAULT` (defaults to `$HOME/Documents/obsidian/obsidian` if unset). Everything below lives under `<vault>/engineering/...`. Use the `Read`/`Write`/`Edit` tools (and `ls` via Bash) with the **absolute** path, e.g. `$OBSIDIAN_AI_VAULT/engineering/<project>/...`. Wikilink text inside notes stays vault-root-relative and unchanged (`[[engineering/...]]`) — never put the absolute path inside `[[...]]`. **Commit to the vault repo (after writing).** Once this run's files are written (the note plus any `index.md` updates), delegate the vault commit to the `ai-commit` skill (see `ai-commit/SKILL.md`). Pass the commit message: ``` ai-code-review: <branch> ``` `ai-commit` resolves the vault root from `$OBSIDIAN_AI_VAULT`, stages, commits, and pushes. Never run `git add` / `git commit` / `git push` directly here. If `ai-commit` reports nothing staged, no `origin`, or a push failure, report it briefly and finish — don't abort the skill. `ai-setup` configures the repo and its `origin`. ### Resolve the project base path 1. Run `git rev-parse --show-toplevel`; the basename is the project name. 2. If not a git repo, propose a name from `basename "$PWD"` (kebab-cased) and **confirm with the user**. 3. Base path: `engineering/<project>`. ### Write the file (one new file per review, never overwrite) Every review creates a **new** file directly in `engineering/<project>/code-reviews/` — never a subfolder, and never overwriting a previous review. Build the file name as `<timestamp>-<branch>.md`: 1. `<timestamp>` = output of `date +%Y-%m-%d-%H%M%S` (e.g. `2026-05-29-143052`). The leading timestamp keeps the folder sorted chronologically. 2. `<branch>` = the current branch with every character outside `[A-Za-z0-9._-]` replaced by `-` (so `/` becomes `-`). Example: `cristiano-pacheco/add-communication-flows` → `cristiano-pacheco-add-communication-flows`. Full path example: `<vault>/engineering/<project>/code-reviews/2026-05-29-143052-cristiano-pacheco-add-communication-flows.md`. Write the file with the `Write` tool (it creates missing parent folders). The second-level timestamp makes each run a distinct file, so you never overwrite a previous review. Below the review's H1, add a related-links blockquote: `> **Project:** [[engineering/<project>/index|<project>]]`. ### Maintain the index (keep the graph connected) After saving, wire the note into the Obsidian graph with append-if-missing. Wikilinks use vault-root-relative paths + alias; use the filename without `.md` as both target and alias. 1. **Project index** — `engineering/<project>/index.md`: read it (if missing, create it with `# <project>` and a `↑ [[engineering/index|Engineering]]` back-link); add a bullet `- [[engineering/<project>/code-reviews/<timestamp>-<branch>|<timestamp>-<branch>]]` under a `## Code Reviews` heading with the `Edit` tool (each review is a new file, so always add one). 2. **Root index** — `engineering/index.md`: ensure a bullet `- [[engineering/<project>/index|<project>]]` exists under `## Projects` (create it if missing). `ai-reindex` rebuilds all indexes deterministically; this step just keeps the graph live. Report the final vault path when done.
From cristiano-pacheco/ai-tools, MIT.
More from cristiano-pacheco/ai-tools
- 0.583score
ai-create-pr
cristiano-pacheco
Write a PR title and description.
SkillAFreshness: A★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.581score
ai-commit
cristiano-pacheco
Commit and push vault artifacts or explicitly scoped code changes.
SkillAFreshness: A★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.562score
ai-code-review
cristiano-pacheco
Review the changes since a fixed point (commit, branch, tag, or merge-base) along two axes: Standards (does the code follow this repo's documented coding…
SkillAFreshness: A★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.556score
ai-implement
cristiano-pacheco
Implement a piece of work based on a spec or set of tickets.
SkillAFreshness: A★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.552score
100-go-rules
cristiano-pacheco
Apply a compact, Go-version-aware rulebook derived from the 100 numbered mistakes cataloged by 100go.co when writing, reviewing, debugging, refactoring…
SkillBFreshness: B★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.543score
ai-execute-task
cristiano-pacheco
Implement the next task from a list.
SkillBFreshness: B★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.543score
ai-codebase-review
cristiano-pacheco
Audit a whole codebase for bottlenecks.
SkillBFreshness: B★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.543score
ai-create-plan
cristiano-pacheco
Create a technical implementation plan.
SkillBFreshness: B★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.543score
ai-create-techspec
cristiano-pacheco
Create a tech spec from a PRD.
SkillBFreshness: B★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.543score
ai-reindex
cristiano-pacheco
Rebuild Obsidian wikilink indexes.
SkillBFreshness: B★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.543score
ai-execute-plan
cristiano-pacheco
Execute a technical implementation plan.
SkillBFreshness: B★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.543score
ai-review-techspec
cristiano-pacheco
Review a tech spec as principal architect.
SkillBFreshness: B★ 1Claude Code +9
Signals
- Stars
- 1
- Forks
- 1
- Open issues
- 0
- Last commit (this folder)
- Oct 5, 2026 (27 days ago)
From GitHub (fetched Oct 24, 2026).
Details
- License
- MIT
- Repository
- github.com/cristiano-pacheco/ai-tools
- First seen
- Oct 24, 2026
- Last checked
- Oct 24, 2026
- Source
- GitHubgithub-graphql
More from cristiano-pacheco
- 0.583score
ai-create-pr
cristiano-pacheco
Write a PR title and description.
SkillAFreshness: A★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.581score
ai-commit
cristiano-pacheco
Commit and push vault artifacts or explicitly scoped code changes.
SkillAFreshness: A★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.562score
ai-code-review
cristiano-pacheco
Review the changes since a fixed point (commit, branch, tag, or merge-base) along two axes: Standards (does the code follow this repo's documented coding…
SkillAFreshness: A★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.556score
ai-implement
cristiano-pacheco
Implement a piece of work based on a spec or set of tickets.
SkillAFreshness: A★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.552score
100-go-rules
cristiano-pacheco
Apply a compact, Go-version-aware rulebook derived from the 100 numbered mistakes cataloged by 100go.co when writing, reviewing, debugging, refactoring…
SkillBFreshness: B★ 1Claude Code +9 - 0.543score
ai-review-techspec
cristiano-pacheco
Review a tech spec as principal architect.
SkillBFreshness: B★ 1Claude Code +9
Done for you
Rather not set it up yourself?
Chalk Labs scopes, builds and runs agents for your team: the task audit, the eval harness, the integrations and the weekly ops report. Fixed scope, priced before we start.
See how we build AI agents →Read the case studies
Chalk Labs is a two-founder AI and growth studio. We build AI agents, CRMs and MVPs for Web3 and AI companies, and have shipped 50+ product and token launches.
- launches shipped
- 50+
- launches shipped
- media placements
- 500+
- media placements
- founders on every account
- 2
- founders on every account
Press we've placed: Forbes · CoinDesk · Decrypt · Cointelegraph · The Block
Rahil Jain, Co-founder, Chalk Labs. Ex-Goldman Sachs engineer. You talk to the person who builds it.
Get ai-full-code-review running in your business
Tell us what you want to automate. A founder replies within one working day with a plan, not a pitch deck.
Cite this page
ai-full-code-review skill. Agent Mart. https://agentmart.dev/skills/cristiano-pacheco-ai-full-code-review (last updated 2026-10-24)