ponytail-review
Reviews the quality of a code change. It checks if the logic is correct, safe, fast, and if all lines are necessary.
What it does
This tool reviews code you've written to find potential issues. It checks if the logic is correct, if it's safe, if it works well with many users, if it has proper tests, if it's fast, and if there's unnecessary code.
When to use it
- ✓Before submitting your code for review by another person.
- ✓When you want to be sure your code won't break the system.
- ✓If you suspect your code might be overly complicated.
Example of what to ask your AI
“Please review this code.”
Want more? Open the sections below.
How to use
The easiest way: copy the message below and paste it into Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor or any AI. It reads the skill and follows the instructions.
Skill link
Ready-to-paste message
How it works
The tool reads the code you changed and related code. It thinks like an experienced developer to find errors, security problems, slowness, or code that can be removed.
Installation
Easiest way: copy the skill link and paste it into Claude, ChatGPT or Cursor asking it to follow the instructions.
In the terminal (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor), in your project folder:
npx skills add DietrichGebert/ponytail --skill ponytail-reviewOr download just the file:
curl -L https://raw.githubusercontent.com/DietrichGebert/ponytail/main/skills/ponytail-review/SKILL.md -o SKILL.mdTechnical content (original SKILL.md)
Original text by the author, straight from GitHub.
Review a change like the senior developer who will be paged when it breaks. Order of importance: correct, safe, holds under load, tested, fast, lean. Lean still matters: every extra line must be read, tested and fixed later. This is a report the user asked for, so give it in full.
1. Understand first
- Review what the user names: uncommitted or staged changes, a branch, a PR link, or files. Nothing named: the uncommitted changes, or the last commit if there are none.
- Read the diff, then the code it touches: callers of every changed function, the functions it calls, the tests, the README.
- Trace the real flow: where data comes in, what is stored, what goes out.
- A change can break code it does not touch. When a signature, return value or behavior changes, grep every caller.
- Find the expected load in the repo (README, deploy config): one person running a script, or many users and processes at once. Judge scale against that, and say which load you assumed.
2. Look for
- Bug: wrong result, crash, missed edge case (empty, zero, last item, rounding, time zones), a caller broken by the change, a fix applied in one caller while the shared function stays broken.
- Risk: security holes (injection, weak randomness, secrets, missing checks on input from users), data loss (errors swallowed, writes in the wrong order, no transaction).
- Scale: fine for one user, wrong for many: check-then-write races, the same work done by every process, memory or lists that only grow, a query per item, O(n^2) on big input, per-process state that must be shared.
- Missing test: risky new logic (a branch, a parser, money, security, data writes, a bug fix) with no test that fails when it breaks. One good test, not coverage.
- Speed: big slowdowns are problems. Small wins (work repeated in a hot loop) are suggestions; some software counts every millisecond.
- Lean: code that should not exist or should be smaller.
- delete: dead code, unused options, speculative features
- reuse: the repo already has this helper (name the path)
- stdlib / native: the standard library or platform already does it; a new dependency for a few lines
- yagni: abstraction with one implementation, config nobody sets
- merge: near-copies that must change together
- split: one function doing several unrelated jobs, so it is hard to read or test. Split by job, never by line count, and never into helpers that exist only to make a function shorter.
3. Check before you report
- Every finding needs a concrete case: "this input or situation leads to this wrong result". No case, no finding.
- Re-read the lines and confirm: the caller exists, the value can really be empty, the code really is unused.
- A shortcut marked with a
shortcut:(or olderponytail:) comment that names its limit is a decision, not a finding, unless the expected load already crosses it. - Propose the smallest fix that works. Prefer fixes that delete code. Never add layers, frameworks or config the problem does not need.
- No style taste, no "consider", no vague worries.
4. Output
Very simple English: short sentences, everyday words. Explain a technical term the first time you use it. The reader may never have seen this code.
Start with What this change does: in two or three sentences.
Then the findings in three groups, skip empty groups:
- Must fix: bug, security, data loss, breaks at the expected load.
- Should fix: risky code without a test, real slowness, duplication, a function that mixes jobs, code that should not exist.
- Nice to have: small speed-ups, shorter forms.
Number findings across all groups, so the user can say "fix 2 and 5". Every finding has all four parts, each one or two short sentences:
- Orders land on the wrong day (
billing/close_day.py:L40-52)- What this is: At midnight this job closes the day and bills all orders of that day.
- Problem: It takes "today" from the server clock, which runs in UTC. An order placed at 00:30 in Berlin is billed on the day before.
- Fix: Compute the day once in the shop's time zone:
datetime.now(ZoneInfo("Europe/Berlin")).date(). One line, nothing else changes. - If we skip it: Late orders show the wrong date, and accounting fixes them by hand.
End with:
Verdict: Ship.orVerdict: fix 1 and 3 first.
…
FAQ
What does 'layperson' mean?
A layperson is someone without technical knowledge or experience in a specific field, like programming.
What is 'code'?
Code is a set of instructions that a computer understands to perform a task.
What is a 'bug'?
A bug is an error in the code that causes the program to not work as expected.
Details
Original description by the author
Quality review of a change: is the logic right, is it safe, does it hold under real load, is risky code tested, is it fast enough, and is every line needed. Reads the connected code, not only the diff. Each finding is explained in plain English. Use for "review this", "code review", "review the last commit", "review my PR", "is this over-engineered", /ponytail-review.
repo: DietrichGebert/ponytail
Popularity
- GitHub stars
- 164k
- Ranking position
- #338
- License
- MIT
- Updated
- 10/15/2026
Comments
- …
More skills from this repository
ponytail-audit
Performs a complete code audit. It finds bugs, security flaws, slow code, and suggests what to remove or improve.
DietrichGebert/ponytail
ponytail-debt
Lists all code shortcuts ('shortcut:') left for later. It helps to see what still needs to be fixed in the project.
DietrichGebert/ponytail
ponytail-gain
Shows the code, cost, and speed savings achieved through optimizations. Useful for understanding the impact of improvements made.
DietrichGebert/ponytail
ponytail-help
Provides a quick guide on how to use tools and commands. It helps to understand the available functionalities.
DietrichGebert/ponytail
Similar skills
cpp-testing
Makes your agent write and improve tests for C++ code. It helps set up testing tools and fix errors.
affaan-m/ECC
csharp-testing
Helps your agent create tests for C# and .NET code. It uses best practices to ensure tests are efficient and reliable.
affaan-m/ECC
django-tdd
Enables your agent to apply testing strategies for Django with pytest-django and TDD. It's useful for writing robust tests and ensuring code quality, especially for DRF APIs.
affaan-m/ECC