Live data from Hacker News

What to Put in a Claude Code Skill for Reviewing Your Team's Code

everyrow.io

11–14 of 14 posts

Re: What to Put in a Claude Code Skill for Reviewing Your Team's Code

#11
post #9

Is there any lesson here for non-devs (like me) who are using CC to write some pretty long, gnarly notebooks. The problem I have recently run into is that CC vibe codes really long code with lots of checks. But, then when I want to modify it, CC has more code to read and it gets overwhelmed. If it didn't include as many checks to begin with, it would be easier to understand what is going on. Any advice? Have you seen…

I mean, have you tried to ask it not to do those checks? It's similar to the OP about no defensive coding. In general, CC works better when you can tell it WHAT TO DO as opposed what NOT to do, but sometimes there is no way around it. What kind of checks it's adding? Like asserting that columns exist and stuff?

Re: What to Put in a Claude Code Skill for Reviewing Your Team's Code

#12
post #8

What's the point of having the testing be done by Claude Code via a skill, rather than just hard-coding the set of tests to be run?

Some of the rules are impossible to code generally enough, right? Like, "no defensive coding" - I can't imagine what kind of AST shenaningas you would have to do without basically banning `if`.

Re: What to Put in a Claude Code Skill for Reviewing Your Team's Code

#13
post #6

> Auto-review on routine PRs produced too much noise. A one-line config change doesn't need a 12-point review Shouldn't you prompt the review to just be a one-line review then? I see real danger in having humans review "the easy fixes" manually, but then rely on Claude for the complicated stuff. I'd be curious to learn whether you have similar prompts and skills for producing code, as opposed to just code review.

what danger?

Maybe like that the humans would not properly review the more complicated ones too? I don't think it's a big danger to be clear.

Re: What to Put in a Claude Code Skill for Reviewing Your Team's Code

#14
post #2

I definitely see a lot of these anti-patterns in the code that CC writes. Many of these can be caught at the time the code is written without needing to wait for a PR review. To me, it seems like most of these instructions belong in CLAUDE.md instead of or in addition to a specialized review skill. Are there things in the review skill that don't belong in CLAUDE.md?

Weirdly, CC still adds stupid comments to guide its next steps despite having that instruction in CLAUDE.md AFAIK.
Post reply on HN