Agent skill · mia-cx
review-relay
Use when the user asks for a review relay or review loop, for repeated or multi-provider review passes on a pull request, for a PR to be reviewed until it is clean or merge-ready, or to address review comments and resolve review discussions on a PR. A request for one review pass over a diff is not a relay.
What it needs
About 13k tokens when loaded.
What this skill does
Review relay Drive the PR for the current branch to merge-readiness as a relay race: each provider runs a read-only review leg, then you verify and fix what is real before handing the new head to the next reviewer. The race ends when a full lap comes back clean. Do not merge; that is a separate, explicit request. The baton is the head SHA. Every handoff passes a head that already absorbed the previous leg's findings; a provider reviewing a stale head is a dropped baton, and its leg does not count. Scope: the diff, and only the diff Every finding must be caused by this diff: a defect these changes introduce, or a latent one they newly expose. Anchor each finding to a line the diff touched, even when the damage lands elsewhere. Read as widely as you need to: callers, callees, tests, config, persisted formats, anything that tells you what the change breaks. That reading is how blast radius gets judged, and it is encouraged. What it is not is a review target. A bug that predates this branch and that the diff does not touch or worsen is out of scope, however real. Someone else's PR owns it. The distinction in practice: the diff changes a function's return shape and an unchanged caller mishandles it. In scope: cite the changed line and name the caller as the consequence. That same caller was already mishandling a case the diff never touches. Out of scope: leave it. Reviewing beyond the diff is the most common way one leg turns into an unbounded audit. Stay inside it. The pressure to leave it comes from the reviewer, and it is persuasive by construction: an out-of-scope finding arrives fully argued with a real defect attached, so agreeing feels like diligence rather than drift. Scope is yours to hold and never the reviewer's to widen; decide it here, before the first report lands. The lineup One reviewer per leg, from one provider, covering all three domains at once. Fix before every handoff; a fresh pair of eyes on fresh code is the point. …
How to use it
Reference it in AdaL, Claude Code, Cursor or any coding agent — nothing to install:
@skills mia-cx/review-relay