elixir-code-review

$npx mdskill add existential-birds/beagle/elixir-code-review

Reviews Elixir code for idiomatic patterns and OTP basics.

  • Ensures Elixir code follows community style and naming conventions.
  • Depends on reference guides for code style, pattern matching, OTP, and documentation.
  • Checks pattern matching, GenServer usage, and module documentation against best practices.
  • Provides a checklist of issues to fix, organized by category.

SKILL.md

.github/skills/elixir-code-reviewView on GitHub ↗
---
name: elixir-code-review
description: Reviews Elixir code for idiomatic patterns, OTP basics, and documentation. Use when reviewing .ex/.exs files, checking pattern matching, GenServer usage, or module documentation.
---

# Elixir Code Review

## Quick Reference

| Issue Type | Reference |
|------------|-----------|
| Naming, formatting, module structure | [references/code-style.md](references/code-style.md) |
| With clauses, guards, destructuring | [references/pattern-matching.md](references/pattern-matching.md) |
| GenServer, Supervisor, Application | [references/otp-basics.md](references/otp-basics.md) |
| @moduledoc, @doc, @spec, doctests | [references/documentation.md](references/documentation.md) |

## Review Checklist

### Code Style
- [ ] Module names are CamelCase, function names are snake_case
- [ ] Pipe chains start with raw data, not function calls
- [ ] Private functions grouped after public functions
- [ ] No unnecessary parentheses in function calls without arguments

### Pattern Matching
- [ ] Functions use pattern matching over conditionals where appropriate
- [ ] With clauses have else handling for error cases
- [ ] Guards used instead of runtime checks where possible
- [ ] Destructuring used in function heads, not body

### OTP Basics
- [ ] GenServers use handle_continue for expensive init work
- [ ] Supervisors use appropriate restart strategies
- [ ] No blocking calls in GenServer callbacks
- [ ] Proper use of call vs cast (sync vs async)

### Documentation
- [ ] All public functions have @doc and @spec
- [ ] Modules have @moduledoc describing purpose
- [ ] Doctests for pure functions where appropriate
- [ ] No @doc false on genuinely public functions

### Security
- [ ] No `String.to_atom/1` on user input (use `to_existing_atom/1`)
- [ ] No `Code.eval_string/1` on untrusted input
- [ ] No `:erlang.binary_to_term/1` without `:safe` option

## Valid Patterns (Do NOT Flag)

- **Empty function clause for pattern match** - `def foo(nil), do: nil` is valid guard
- **Using `|>` with single transformation** - Readability choice, not wrong
- **`@doc false` on callback implementations** - Callbacks documented at behaviour level
- **Private functions without @spec** - @spec optional for internals
- **Using `Kernel.apply/3`** - Valid for dynamic dispatch with known module/function

## Context-Sensitive Rules

| Issue | Flag ONLY IF |
|-------|--------------|
| Missing @spec | Function is public AND exported |
| Generic rescue | Specific exception types available |
| Nested case/cond | More than 2 levels deep |

## When to Load References

- Reviewing module/function naming → code-style.md
- Reviewing with/case/cond statements → pattern-matching.md
- Reviewing GenServer/Supervisor code → otp-basics.md
- Reviewing @doc/@moduledoc → documentation.md

## Gates — before reporting

Do these **in order** for the review batch. Do not publish findings until each step passes.

1. **Protocol loaded** — Read [review-verification-protocol](../review-verification-protocol/SKILL.md) and apply its checks for each finding category you use (unused, validation, security, performance, etc.). **Pass:** For every substantive finding, you can name which protocol subsection you satisfied or state **N/A** with reason (pure style).
2. **Anchored evidence** — **Pass:** Each finding includes a concrete locator: `path:line` (or line range), or `Module.function/arity` plus a short quoted snippet from the file.
3. **Claims backed by artifacts** — For assertions like unused code, missing validation, or security risk, **Pass:** You attach the supporting artifact (e.g. search results, file read scope) or downgrade the item to an explicit **question** / **uncertain** with what you did not verify.

## Before Submitting Findings

Complete **Gates — before reporting** (section above) first; the verification protocol is mandatory input to those gates.

More from existential-birds/beagle

SkillDescription
adr-decision-extractionUse when you need to mine a conversation, session transcript, or design discussion for architectural decisions before writing ADRs. Identifies problem-solution pairs, trade-off debates, technology choices, and explicit \"[ADR]\" tags. Triggers on \"what decisions did we make\", \"extract decisions from this chat\", \"find the choices in our discussion\", or \"summarize architectural decisions\". Also useful after long planning sessions to capture decisions that were made implicitly. Does NOT write ADR documents \u2014 use adr-writing or write-adr for that.
adr-writingUse when writing or formatting an ADR document using the MADR template, applying Definition of Done (E.C.A.D.R.) criteria, or verifying ADR completeness. Triggers on \"write the ADR\", \"format as MADR\", \"check ADR quality\", \"mark gaps in ADR\". Also triggers when a decision has been extracted and needs to become a document. Does NOT extract decisions from conversations (use adr-decision-extraction) or orchestrate the full extract-confirm-write workflow (use write-adr).
agent-architecture-analysisUse when auditing an agent codebase against the 12-Factor Agents methodology, reviewing LLM-powered system architecture, or assessing agentic app compliance. Triggers on \"analyze agent architecture\", \"12-factor audit\", \"how compliant is this agent\", or \"evaluate this LLM app\". Also applies when comparing frameworks or planning agent improvements. Not for quick checklists \u2014 this performs deep per-factor codebase analysis with file-level evidence.
app-intents-code-reviewReviews App Intents code for intent structure, entities, shortcuts, and parameters. Use when reviewing code with import AppIntents, @AppIntent, AppEntity, AppShortcutsProvider, or @Parameter.
artifact-analysisUse when the user wants a cited, structured read of local documents and project knowledge. Triggers on: \"analyze these docs\", \"scan my project for context\", \"read the docs folder\", \"summarize what's in .beagle/concepts/\", \"extract context from docs/\", \"what's in this folder\", \"go read everything in X and tell me what's there\". Also invoked programmatically by other beagle skills (prfaq-beagle Ignition, brainstorm-beagle reference points, strategy-interview context grounding) via the companion contract. Does NOT trigger on codebase lookups (\"find this function\", \"search the repo\"), web research (use web-research), LLM-as-judge evaluation (use llm-judge), or document editing (use humanize-beagle). Produces a written scan plan, parallel-subagent findings, and a cited synthesis report on disk — never inline prose, never unsourced claims.
axum-code-reviewReviews axum web framework code for routing patterns, extractor usage, middleware, state management, and error handling. Use when reviewing Rust code that uses axum, tower, or hyper for HTTP services. Covers axum 0.7+ patterns including State, Path, Query, Json extractors.
brainstorm-beagleUse when the user has a fuzzy idea and wants to shape it into a concrete project spec before planning or building. Triggers on: \"brainstorm this\", \"I have an idea for...\", \"help me think through this project\", \"what should I build\", \"spec this out\". Also catches vague feature descriptions needing structured questioning to clarify scope. Does NOT write code, plan implementation, review strategy docs, or run strategy interviews \u2014 produces a WHAT/WHY spec through dialogue, not a HOW plan.
bubbletea-code-reviewReviews BubbleTea TUI code for proper Elm architecture, model/update/view patterns, and Lipgloss styling. Use when reviewing terminal UI code using charmbracelet/bubbletea.
cloudkit-code-reviewReviews CloudKit code for container setup, record handling, subscriptions, and sharing patterns. Use when reviewing code with import CloudKit, CKContainer, CKRecord, CKShare, or CKSubscription.
combine-code-reviewReviews Combine framework code for memory leaks, operator misuse, and error handling. Use when reviewing code with import Combine, AnyPublisher, @Published, PassthroughSubject, or CurrentValueSubject.