B

Skill 详情

brooks-lint

AI code reviewer grounded in classic software engineering books for catching design smells, coupling issues, and architectural risks.

来源平台:GitHub
来源标识:sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills
源文件:原始说明
前端设计 超热门 GitHub 低 风险 下载 1.8万Stars 3.68万 GitHub Copilot
来源平台GitHub
文档版本SKILL.md
热度超热门
排名信号下载 1.8万
概述 安装 文档 下载

快速判断

AI code reviewer grounded in classic software engineering books for catching design smells, coupling issues, and architectural risks.

最后校验2026-05-27
来源平台GitHub
安全提示
下载副本ZIP 可用

适合任务

  • 把重复任务整理成可复用的 AI 操作流程。
  • 让 AI 在特定场景下按统一规范执行。
  • 为团队或个人工作流提供可复制的任务说明。

输入与输出

输入:任务目标、上下文材料、文件路径、约束条件或需要处理的内容。

输出:按 Skill 说明生成的文档、代码、检查结果、计划、建议或操作步骤。

示例任务

  • 使用 brooks-lint 帮我处理当前任务,并说明执行前需要确认的输入。
  • 根据 brooks-lint 的说明,给我一个安全的使用步骤清单。

安装方式

  1. 下载本站提供的 Skill ZIP 并解压。
  2. 把解压后的 Skill 目录放入当前 AI 工具支持的 skills 目录。
  3. 如需在线查看原始内容,可打开 GitHub 的 SKILL.md

在线原始地址:brooks-lint/SKILL.md

风险边界

使用前请检查权限、外部依赖和要处理的数据类型。不要把密码、密钥、身份信息或敏感客户资料交给未经确认的 Skill。

SKILL.md 文档介绍

Brooks Lint

Overview

Brooks Lint is a Claude Code skill that reviews your code through the lens of 12 classic software engineering books. Instead of checking style rules, it asks: "What would the authors of *The Pragmatic Programmer*, *Clean Code*, and *Designing Data-Intensive Applications* say about this code?"

It synthesizes the principles from landmark engineering books into actionable, structured feedback — catching design smells, tight coupling, missing abstractions, and architectural risks that linters and AI tools typically miss.

Named after Fred Brooks, author of *The Mythical Man-Month* — because the hardest bugs are conceptual, not syntactic.

The 12 Books

| Book | Key Principles Applied |

|------|----------------------|

| *The Pragmatic Programmer* | DRY, orthogonality, tracer bullets |

| *Clean Code* | Naming, function size, comment clarity |

| *The Mythical Man-Month* | Conceptual integrity, second-system effect |

| *Designing Data-Intensive Applications* | Data consistency, fault tolerance, scalability |

| *A Philosophy of Software Design* | Deep modules, information hiding, complexity |

| *Refactoring* | Code smells, extract method, encapsulation |

| *Working Effectively with Legacy Code* | Seams, characterization tests, dependency breaking |

| *Domain-Driven Design* | Ubiquitous language, bounded contexts, aggregates |

| *Release It!* | Stability patterns, timeouts, bulkheads, circuit breakers |

| *Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs* | Abstraction, recursion, metalinguistic abstraction |

| *The Art of UNIX Programming* | Modularity, composability, rule of least surprise |

| *Extreme Programming Explained* | YAGNI, simple design, collective ownership |

When to Use This Skill

  • Use when you want architectural feedback beyond what linters provide
  • Use before major refactors to identify structural debt
  • Use when reviewing code that "works but feels wrong"
  • Use when onboarding to a codebase to quickly map risk areas
  • Use for design reviews before starting a new module or service

How It Works

Brooks Lint applies each book's core principles as a review lens:

1. Smell detection: Flags violations of DRY, SRP, Law of Demeter, etc.

2. Coupling analysis: Identifies tight dependencies and missing abstraction layers

3. Naming critique: Applies Clean Code naming rules to variables, methods, classes

4. Architecture review: Checks for DDIA-style data consistency and fault tolerance gaps

5. Stability patterns: Flags missing timeouts, retries, and circuit breakers (Release It!)

6. Complexity scoring: Applies APOSD complexity metrics to identify over-engineered sections

Installation

# Install via Claude Code plugin marketplace
# Search: "brooks-lint" in Claude Code > Extensions

# Or install via NPX (Antigravity)
npx antigravity-awesome-skills --claude
# Then invoke: @brooks-lint

Examples

Example 1: Review a Service Class

@brooks-lint review src/services/PaymentService.ts

Brooks Lint output:

[Pragmatic Programmer] DRY violation: payment validation logic duplicated in 3 places
[Clean Code] Method processPayment() does 4 things — violates Single Responsibility
[Release It!] No timeout on external payment gateway call — risk of cascade failure
[DDIA] No idempotency key — retry on network error will double-charge
[APOSD] PaymentService knows too much about UserRepository — high coupling

Example 2: Full Codebase Architecture Review

@brooks-lint analyze the overall architecture of this codebase

Example 3: Pre-Refactor Review

@brooks-lint what are the biggest design smells in this module before I refactor it?

Review Categories

| Category | Books Applied | What It Catches |

|----------|--------------|-----------------|

| DRY / Duplication | PP, Refactoring | Copy-paste code, shared logic not extracted |

| Naming | Clean Code, DDD | Unclear names, domain language violations |

| Coupling | APOSD, PP | Tight dependencies, missing interfaces |

| Stability | Release It! | Missing timeouts, no retry logic, no circuit breakers |

| Data Integrity | DDIA | Race conditions, non-idempotent operations |

| Complexity | APOSD, SICP | Over-engineering, unnecessary abstraction |

| Legacy Debt | WELC | Hard-to-test code, missing seams |

| Domain Clarity | DDD, XP | Anemic models, missing bounded contexts |

Best Practices

  • Run @brooks-lint after writing new service layers or data pipelines
  • Combine with @logic-lens for full coverage: logic bugs + design smells
  • Use @brooks-lint analyze architecture weekly on growing codebases
  • Focus on CRITICAL and HIGH findings first — LOW findings are style suggestions

Related Skills

  • @logic-lens — Complementary: catches logic bugs; brooks-lint catches design issues
  • @security-auditor — Specialized security-only deep scan
  • @lint-and-validate — Style/syntax linting to run alongside design review

Additional Resources

Limitations

Use this skill only when the task clearly matches the scope described above (design review and architectural analysis). Brooks Lint applies AI-powered analysis grounded in established engineering principles. It should complement — not replace — human design review for production-critical decisions. Results reflect the principles of the 12 source books and may not apply to all architectural styles or domains.

建议反馈