01
What this skill does
Use this skill when a change needs a thermonuclear maintainability review rather than a general correctness review. It reviews the relevant scope, writes a Markdown report, applies a 350-line threshold for maintained source files, recursively sweeps structural candidates until coverage reaches a fixed point or is marked incomplete, and avoids code changes unless explicitly asked for fixes.
02
When to use it
- 01Reviewing whether a diff makes the implementation more tangled, oversized, indirect, or hard to extend.
- 02Finding missed code-judo simplifications, decomposition opportunities, canonical-ownership moves, and clearer type boundaries.
- 03Producing a durable structural review artifact with findings, recursive coverage, line-count evidence, and residual blind spots.
03
How it works
- 01
Set the review scope and baseline, preferring staged changes before the working tree when the user does not name a scope.
- 02
Build a diff and line-count inventory, including the 350-line maintained-source threshold check.
- 03
Seed a recursive candidate frontier from file growth, branches, helpers, abstractions, types, ownership boundaries, orchestration, tests, and duplicated blocks.
- 04
Trace each candidate inward and outward through local flow, call sites, contracts, tests, and canonical helpers.
- 05
Append newly discovered simplification candidates until the frontier reaches a fixed point or uncovered areas are explicitly marked.
- 06
Write a Markdown report with recommendation, findings, decomposition gaps, recursive coverage ledger, and evidence appendix.
04
What you get back
- 01A Markdown thermo-nuclear code-quality report.
- 02A short terminal summary with recommendation, completion status, severity counts, and top structural risks.
- 03A recursive coverage ledger, line-count ledger, candidate sweep log, and quality-gate recommendation.
05
Important boundaries
- 01Do not make code changes during review unless the user explicitly asks for fixes.
- 02Do not treat passing tests as proof that the implementation is structurally sound.
- 03Do not silently waive the 350-line maintained-source threshold; account for oversized files or mark the area uncovered.
- 04Use `code-review` instead when correctness, security, privacy, data loss, or merge safety is the main question.
06