Atlas / Skills / tirth8205 / Review Changes

Review ChangesSAFE

skills/tirth8205/review-changes

Local-first code intelligence graph for MCP and CLI. Builds a persistent map of your codebase so AI coding tools read only what matters, with benchmarked context reductions on reviews and large-repo workflows.

Verdict
SAFE
Grade
B
Trust score
89 /100
Version
—
Hosts
—
License
MIT
Stars
31,939
01

Overview

Local-first code intelligence graph for MCP and CLI. Builds a persistent map of your codebase so AI coding tools read only what matters, with benchmarked context reductions on reviews and large-repo workflows.

Read from source at commit a9c894db76a7OBSERVED · 2026-10-06
02

What it tells the agent

The instruction file, verbatim from the audited commit — this is the text the model reads, and the surface the audit's instruction layer examines. Quoted here so you can judge it without cloning anything.

---
name: review-changes
description: Perform a structured code review using change detection and impact
---

## Review Changes

Review a change set with risk scores and blast radius from the knowledge graph.

### Steps

1. Call `detect_changes_tool` for risk-scored changed functions, test gaps and affected flows.
2. Call `get_affected_flows_tool` only when you need the steps of an affected flow.
3. For each high-risk function, call `query_graph_tool` with `pattern="tests_for"` to check test coverage.
4. Call `get_impact_radius_tool` when the blast radius is not clear from step 1.
5. Suggest specific test cases for untested changes.

### Output Format

Group findings by risk level (high, medium, low). For each finding give what changed and why it matters, its test coverage, and the suggested fix. End with a merge recommendation.

## Token Efficiency Rules
- Call `get_minimal_context_tool(task="<your task>")` before any other graph tool.
- Pass `detail_level="minimal"` wherever a tool accepts it. Use "standard" only when minimal is not enough.
- Prefer a targeted `query_graph_tool` call over a broad listing call.
- Budget: about five tool calls and 800 tokens of graph output per task.
- Read the implementation and its tests before changing code. The graph narrows scope; it does not replace the source.
03

Trust audit

SAFEgrade B · trust 89/100 Nothing in the source contradicts what it says it does. Grade A is reserved for packages that have also passed the behavioural sandbox.

LayerWhat it checksResult
L0Provenance & inventoryPASS
L1Static analysis of the codeNA
L2Instruction surface (what it tells the agent)PASS
L3Class-specific surfacePASS
L4Behavioural (sandbox)SKIPPED

What the source does

Filesystem
none-observed
Network
none-observed
Shell
none-observed
Dependencies
pinned
Secrets in source
none-found

Findings (0)

No findings outside the package's declared scope.

Gates applied: no_behavioural_pass.

Audited 2026-10-06 · audit v0.4.1 · source sha a9c894db76a7full audit observations/trust-audit/skill/tirth8205__review-changes.json · Report an issue / request a re-scan
04

Audit history

Every audit this skill has had.

DateSourceVerdictGradeScoreChange
2026-10-06a9c894db76a7SAFEB89first audit
05

Questions

What does the Review Changes skill do?

Local-first code intelligence graph for MCP and CLI. Builds a persistent map of your codebase so AI coding tools read only what matters, with benchmarked context reductions on reviews and large-repo workflows.

Is Review Changes safe to install?

The audit found nothing in the source that contradicts what it says it does, and graded it B (89/100). Grade A is held back for packages that have also passed a sandboxed behavioural run, which is why a clean skill reads B.

What can Review Changes access on my machine?

The audit observed no filesystem, network or shell use at all in its source.

How current is this page?

The grade is for one exact copy of the source (a9c894db76a7), read on 2026-10-06. The repository is watched, and a new audit runs when it changes — this is the first audit.

Advertisement