Skill: paperboardofficial/claude-review (version 1.0.1)

--- name: claude-review description: "Self-review quality gate using Claude CLI. When the user says 'review your work', 'use review-work', or 'check your output', run review-work with the task summary, --context pointing to your output file/folder, and --skill pointing to the skill used (if any). You determine all arguments yourself — the user does NOT need to specify them. Requires `claude` CLI installed." license: MIT metadata: version: "3.0.0" tags: - quality - review - self-review - code review - quality gate - claude cli - learnings triggers: - "review your work" - "use review-work" - "check your output" - "self-review" - "quality check" - "review before finishing" --- # claude-review — Self-Review Quality Gate Uses Claude CLI (`claude --print`) as an independent reviewer to catch errors, missed requirements, and quality issues in your work before delivering to the user. ## How It Works 1. You complete your task and save output to file(s) 2. `review-work` sends your work to a separate Claude instance for independent review 3. If a skill was used, the reviewer checks against the skill's specific requirements 4. If LESSONS.md exists, the reviewer checks for repeat mistakes 5. Issues are returned with severity ratings (critical / major / minor) and a PASS/FAIL verdict 6. You fix issues and re-review until clean The reviewer is a **separate Claude instance** — it has no context of your conversation, so it reviews purely on merit. **Auto-learning:** When a review fails, critical and major issues are automatically logged to `LESSONS.md`. This file is auto-included in future reviews so the reviewer checks for repeat mistakes. ## Prerequisites - `claude` CLI must be installed and available in PATH (`npm install -g @anthropic-ai/claude-code`) - Valid API key configured for Claude CLI ## Command ```bash review-work "<task_summary>" --context <file_or_folder> [--skill <file_or_folder>] ``` | Argument | Required | Description | |----------|----------|-------------| | `task_summary` | Yes | What the work was supposed to accomplish | | `--context <path>` | Yes | File or folder containing the work to review. Can also include reference material, test output, or anything relevant. | | `--skill <path>` | No | SKILL.md or skill folder used for this task. The reviewer uses its requirements as a definition of done. | **Auto-included (no flag needed):** - `LESSONS.md` — if it exists, always included so the reviewer checks for repeat mistakes All paths accept both files and folders. Claude reads all file types natively (text, images, PDFs, code). ## Workflow When instructed to review your work: 1. **Identify** every file you created or modified 2. **Run** `review-work` with the task summary, `--context` pointing to your output, and `--skill` if a skill was used 3. **Read** the review output — look for VERDICT: PASS or FAIL 4. **Fix** any critical or major issues 5. **Re-run** `review-work` after fixing (up to 3 cycles) 6. **Report** the review summary in your final output ## Examples Review a single file: ```bash review-work "Write a Python email validator" --context /tmp/email.py ``` Review with skill context (reviewer verifies against skill requirements): ```bash review-work "Write an SEO blog about class action lawsuits" --context /tmp/blog.md --skill ~/.openclaw/workspace/skills/seo-content-writer/SKILL.md ``` Review an entire project folder: ```bash review-work "Build a todo app with React" --context /tmp/todo-app/ --skill ~/skills/fullstack/SKILL.md ``` Review with extra context (reference articles, test output, etc.): ```bash # Put your output + reference material in one folder review-work "Write a blog matching MoneyPilot tone" --context /tmp/blog-project/ ``` ## Rules 1. Review **every** file you created or modified — not just the main one 2. If a skill was used for the task, always pass `--skill` 3. If the review reports critical or major issues → fix them → re-review (up to 3 cycles) 4. Only finish after the verdict is **PASS** (zero critical/major issues) 5. Include the review summary in your final output 6. After 3 failed cycles, finish but attach the full review report ## What NOT to Do - Do NOT ask the user for arguments — you already know what you created and which skill you used - Do NOT say "review passed" without actually running the command - Do NOT fabricate review results — the command produces real output - Do NOT forget `--skill` when a skill was involved in the task ## LESSONS.md Failed reviews are auto-logged to `LESSONS.md` (default: `~/.openclaw/workspace/LESSONS.md`). Override the path with the `LESSONS_FILE` environment variable. This file is also auto-read on every review, so the reviewer checks: "are any past mistakes being repeated?"


Security scan verdicts — ClawScan: suspicious | static analysis: clean | VirusTotal: clean | SkillSpector: suspicious (HIGH)