hyhmrright/

brooks-lint

GitHub Website

AI code reviews grounded in 12 classic engineering books — decay risk diagnostics with book citations, severity labels, and 6 analysis modes including full-sweep auto-fix

1.3kstars

61forks

2issues

MITlicense

2026since

Star historydaily snapshots by VibeCrowd

Collecting history — the radar snapshots this repo daily. The trend line appears after 3 days of data (1 so far).

Alternatives & relatedmatched by topic overlap

DietrichGebert/

ponytail

▲ 4.8k/wk

Makes your AI agent think like the laziest senior dev in the room. The best code is the code you never wrote.

96k5.3kJavaScriptnew

thedotmack/

claude-mem

▲ 660/wk

Persistent Context Across Sessions for Every Agent – Captures everything your agent does during sessions, compresses it with AI, and injects relevant context back into future sessions. Works with Claude Code, OpenClaw, Codex, Gemini, Hermes, Copilot, OpenCode + More

90k7.8kJavaScript

tirth8205/

code-review-graph

▲ 1.1k/wk

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.

28k2.6kPython

usestrix/

strix

▲ 2.6k/wk

Open-source AI penetration testing tool to find and fix your app’s vulnerabilities.

48k5.1kPython

affaan-m/

ECC

▲ 2.9k/wk

The agent harness performance optimization system. Skills, instincts, memory, security, and research-first development for Claude Code, Codex, Opencode, Cursor and beyond.

238k36kJavaScript

JuliusBrussee/

caveman

▲ 1.8k/wk

🪨 why use many token when few token do trick — Claude Code skill that cuts 65% of tokens by talking like caveman

96k5.5kJavaScript

Comparebrooks-lint vs ponytail brooks-lint vs claude-mem brooks-lint vs code-review-graph

Agent skills inside · 9

All skills →

brooks-auditArchitecture audit that maps module dependencies, checks layering integrity, and flags structural decay across a codebase, drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user asks to audit architecture, review folder/module structure, check for circular imports, understand how the codebase is organized, or asks "does this follow clean architecture?" or "why does everything depend on everything?". Also triggers for onboarding requests: "explain this codebase to a new developer" or "give me a codebase tour" (use onboarding mode). Do NOT trigger for: PR-level code review (use brooks-Security brooks-debtTech debt assessment that identifies, classifies, and prioritizes maintainability problems — helping teams build a refactoring roadmap — drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user asks about tech debt, refactoring priorities, what to clean up first, or asks "why is this so hard to change?", "what should we fix first?", or "how do I justify refactoring to management?". Do NOT trigger for: server health checks, HTTP /health endpoints, Kubernetes probes, database health, or application uptime — "health" in those contexts is infrastructure, not code quality. Also not for singDevOps & Cloud brooks-reviewPR code review that surfaces decay risks, design smells, and maintainability issues with concrete Symptom → Source → Consequence → Remedy findings, drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user asks to review code, check a PR, shares a diff or pastes code asking "does this look right?" / "any issues here?" / "ready to merge?", or asks for feedback on a function, class, or file. Also triggers when user mentions: code smells / refactoring / clean architecture / DDD / SOLID principles / Hyrum's Law / deep modules / tactical programming / conceptual integrity / Brooks's Law / MyCode Review & Quality brooks-testTest quality review drawing on twelve classic engineering books — with primary focus on xUnit Test Patterns, The Art of Unit Testing, How Google Tests Software, and Working Effectively with Legacy Code — that diagnoses structural problems in an existing test suite: brittleness, mock abuse, coverage illusions, slow execution, poor readability. Triggers when: user asks about test quality, shares test files for review, or expresses frustration: "tests keep breaking whenever I change anything", "our tests take forever", "tests pass but bugs still reach production", or "we have too many mocks". Do Testing & QA brooks-sweepFull-sweep mode: runs a unified analysis across all quality dimensions — code decay, architecture, tech debt, and test quality — then applies fixes directly to the codebase. Safe changes are auto-applied; risky changes are confirmed before execution. Drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user wants to "fix everything", "sweep the codebase", "auto-fix all issues", "clean up the whole project", or asks for a single command that both diagnoses and remediates quality problems. Do NOT trigger for: read-only audits or health reports where the user only wants findings without coTesting & QA brooks-healthCombined codebase health dashboard that scores a project across all four quality dimensions — PR quality, architecture, tech debt, and test quality — in a single pass, drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user wants an overall quality assessment, asks "how healthy is this codebase?", "run all the checks", "I need a health score before the release", or wants to onboard a new team with a quality overview. Do NOT trigger for: server health checks, HTTP health endpoints, Kubernetes liveness/readiness probes, database health, or application uptime. Also do not trigger when thTesting & QA

SharePost on X LinkedIn