cursor-review
GitHub作为顾问性第二意见运行 Cursor Composer 审查。当用户触发 cursor:review、请求审查或希望校验 diff 时启用。Cursor 仅提供只读建议，最终批准或修改决定由主模型（Host Brain）做出，确保审查权归属明确。
Trigger Scenarios
Install
npx skills add Chachamaru127/claude-code-harness --skill cursor-review -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "cursor-review",
"description": "Run a Cursor Composer review as an advisory second opinion while keeping the primary review verdict on the host brain. Use when user invokes cursor:review, asks Cursor to review, or wants composer to sanity-check a diff. Cursor never owns APPROVE\/REQUEST_CHANGES.",
"allowed-tools": [
"Read",
"Bash",
"Grep"
],
"argument-hint": "[--base <ref>] [review-scope]",
"description-en": "Run a Cursor Composer review as an advisory second opinion while keeping the primary review verdict on the host brain. Use when user invokes cursor:review, asks Cursor to review, or wants composer to sanity-check a diff. Cursor never owns APPROVE\/REQUEST_CHANGES.",
"description-ja": "Cursor Composer に advisory second opinion としてレビューさせるスキル。cursor:review、Cursor にレビューして、composer で差分を sanity check して、という時に使う。primary verdict は常に host brain が持ち、Cursor は APPROVE\/REQUEST_CHANGES を所有しない。",
"user-invocable": true
}
cursor:review - Advisory Cursor Review
Cursor Composer (composer-2.5-fast) を read-only second opinion として使う review skill。primary verdict は host brain (Opus / Claude role) が出す。
Quick Reference
cursor:review --base origin/main
cursor:review "Phase 88.5 command namespace diff"
Rules
-
Cursor review is advisory. The final verdict must come from the host reviewer.
-
Do not pass
--writetocursor-companion.sh. -
Use resolver/model routing, not direct env checks:
bash scripts/resolve-impl-backend.sh --backend cursor --role reviewer bash scripts/model-routing.sh --host cursor --role worker --field model -
Prefer the existing
harness-reviewcontract when a full review is requested. This command exists for users who explicitly ask for the Cursor lane.
Flow
-
Resolve the Harness helper root:
HARNESS_PLUGIN_ROOT="${HARNESS_PLUGIN_ROOT:-${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT:-}}" if [ -z "$HARNESS_PLUGIN_ROOT" ] && [ -n "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR:-}" ]; then probe="$(cd "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}" && pwd)" while [ "$probe" != "/" ] && [ ! -d "$probe/scripts" ]; do probe="$(cd "$probe/.." && pwd)" done [ -d "$probe/scripts" ] && HARNESS_PLUGIN_ROOT="$probe" fi if [ -z "$HARNESS_PLUGIN_ROOT" ]; then echo "ERROR: HARNESS_PLUGIN_ROOT is not set and could not be derived from CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT or CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR" >&2 exit 2 fi -
Determine review scope:
BASE_REF="${TASK_BASE_REF:-origin/main}" REVIEW_SCOPE="${ARGUMENTS:-}" if [ -n "${REVIEW_SCOPE}" ]; then set -- ${REVIEW_SCOPE} while [ "$#" -gt 0 ]; do case "$1" in --base) BASE_REF="${2:?--base requires a ref}" shift 2 ;; --base=*) BASE_REF="${1#--base=}" shift ;; *) shift ;; esac done fi DIFF_STAT="$(git diff --stat "${BASE_REF}..HEAD")" DIFF_TEXT="$(git diff "${BASE_REF}..HEAD")" -
Ask Cursor in read-only mode:
PROMPT="$(cat <<EOF
Review this diff as an advisory second opinion. Base ref: ${BASE_REF} Requested scope: ${ARGUMENTS:-full diff}
Focus on bugs, regressions, missing tests, and unsafe assumptions. Do not propose broad refactors.
Diff stat: ${DIFF_STAT}
Diff: ${DIFF_TEXT} EOF )" bash "${HARNESS_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/cursor-companion.sh" task "${PROMPT}"
4. Host reads Cursor's output and performs the primary review:
- Findings first, ordered by severity.
- Mark Cursor-originated points as advisory when used.
- `APPROVE` / `REQUEST_CHANGES` must be the host decision, not a copied Cursor verdict.
## Output
Use the standard review shape:
- findings
- open questions
- validation run
- final host verdict
Version History
- c220671 Current 2026-07-05 14:44
