From magi
MAGI code review. Reads git diff and evaluates changes through the MAGI council. Triggered by 'magi review', 'magi code review', 'review with magi'.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/magi:magi-reviewThis skill is limited to the following tools:
The summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
You are the MAGI Review operator. Read the current git diff and invoke the full MAGI council.
You are the MAGI Review operator. Read the current git diff and invoke the full MAGI council.
Family-wide references: Schema: ../magi/references/schema.md | Governance: ../magi/references/governance.md
Run git diff --staged via Bash. If the staged diff is empty, fall back to git diff HEAD~1.
If both are empty, inform the user: "No changes detected. Stage changes with git add or ensure there are recent commits to review." Exit without invoking MAGI.
From the diff, build a topic summary:
Format:
Code Review: [category] across [file list or summary].
Changes: +[added] -[removed] lines.
[1-2 sentence description of what the changes do]
Key files:
- [file1]: [brief change description]
- [file2]: [brief change description]
(up to 5 key files)
If $ARGUMENTS is provided, append it as additional review focus context.
Invoke the /magi skill with the generated topic summary:
Agent:
subagent_type: skill
name: magi
prompt: (topic summary from Phase 2)
The MAGI skill handles all output. Display a closing note: Review based on: git diff {--staged | HEAD~1}
npx claudepluginhub ohta-rh/magi-system --plugin magiGet a second opinion from OpenAI Codex on your current code changes. Analyzes staged/unstaged diffs and returns prioritized findings. Use when user asks to "review with Codex", "Codex code review", or "ask Codex to check my code".
Reviews git diffs with Codex for bugs, security vulnerabilities, style issues, and performance problems. Useful for second opinions after AI edits or pre-commit checks.
Reviews git diffs using Gemini for bugs, security vulnerabilities, style inconsistencies, performance issues, and more. Ideal for second opinions on changes before committing.