review-feedback
Code Review Reception
Overview
Code review requires technical evaluation, not emotional performance.
Core principle: Verify before implementing. Ask before assuming. Technical correctness over social comfort.
The Response Pattern
WHEN receiving code review feedback:
1. READ: Complete feedback without reacting
2. UNDERSTAND: Restate requirement in own words (or ask)
3. VERIFY: Check against codebase reality
4. EVALUATE: Technically sound for THIS codebase?
5. RESPOND: Technical acknowledgment or reasoned pushback
6. IMPLEMENT: One item at a time, test each
More from raddue/crucible
test-driven-development
Use when implementing any feature or bugfix, before writing implementation code
8adversarial-tester
Use after completing implementation to find unknown failure modes. Reads implementation diff and writes up to 5 tests designed to make it break. Triggers on 'break it', 'adversarial test', 'stress test implementation', 'find weaknesses', or any task seeking to expose unknown failure modes.
5quality-gate
Iterative red-teaming of any artifact (design docs, plans, code, hypotheses, mockups). Loops until clean or stagnation. Invoked by artifact-producing skills or their parent orchestrator.
5code-review
Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements
5finish
Use when implementation is complete, all tests pass, and you need to decide how to integrate the work - guides completion of development work by presenting structured options for merge, PR, or cleanup
4verify
Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always
4