@goniz/mlx-review
AReview changes in the MLX submodule for concrete bugs, behavioral regressions, structural mismatches, and obvious performance problems. Use when asked to review uncommitted `mlx/` changes, a supplied diff, commit, file, or change set and provide actionable evidence-based feedback without modifying code.
Install
agr install @goniz/mlx-review --target claudeWrites 1 file into .claude/skills/, pinned to git-3073f72e.
- .claude/skills/mlx-review/SKILL.md
Document
name: mlx-review
description: Review changes in the MLX submodule for concrete bugs, behavioral regressions, structural mismatches, and obvious performance problems. Use when asked to review uncommitted mlx/ changes, a supplied diff, commit, file, or change set and provide actionable evidence-based feedback without modifying code.
Review MLX Changes
Review code changes, not pre-existing code. Do not modify files.
- Resolve the requested review target. With no target, inspect
git -C mlx diff,git -C mlx diff --cached, andgit -C mlx status --short. - Read the full contents of every modified and untracked file, not only the diff. Read
AGENTS.md,.editorconfig, and other applicable conventions. - Investigate uncertain behavior through surrounding code and established patterns before reporting an issue.
- Prioritize concrete bugs: logic and boundary errors, incorrect guards, error handling, race conditions, security risks, and unintended behavior changes.
- Flag structural mismatches only when they conflict with established project patterns. Flag performance only when clearly problematic, such as unbounded quadratic work or blocking I/O on a hot path.
- Do not invent hypothetical concerns. State the realistic input, environment, or control-flow condition required for every finding.
Report findings first, ordered by severity, with path:line, a concise explanation, the triggering scenario, and why it is a defect. State explicitly when no actionable findings remain. Keep the tone factual and avoid non-actionable praise or style preferences.
Trustgrade A
- passBody integrity
Whether the stored document is plausibly the kind of file the artifact declares, rather than something fetched by mistake.
- passType matchnot applicable to this artifact type
Whether the artifact is really the kind of thing its metadata claims it is.
- passFreshness
How long since the source repository was last pushed to.
- passPrompt injection
Scans the artifact's own text for instructions aimed at your agent rather than at you.
- passLicense
Whether the source repository declares an SPDX license permissive enough to redistribute.
How the grade is calculated
Each check contributes 0 points when it passes, 1 when it warns, and 2 when it fails. The total maps to a letter:
- Aevery check passed
- Bone warning
- Ctwo warnings
- Dprompt injection or body integrity failed, or three warnings
- Fone of those failed, and something else is wrong
These are automated hygiene checks, not a security audit, and not a dependency or vulnerability scan. A grade of A means nothing was flagged — not that the artifact is safe.
Versions
git-3073f72e6b482026-07-31