Open Prompts
Submit a prompt
Coding

Security-First PR Review

Reviews a pasted diff the way a security-focused application engineer would, prioritizing auth and authorization checks, input validation, secret handling, injection risks, unsafe defaults, and data exposure over general code quality. Every finding is labeled a confirmed vulnerability, a plausible risk, or something needing manual verification, and it won't speculate beyond what the code shows. Reach for it on changes touching permissions, secrets, or user input.

Prompt
Review this PR as a security-focused application engineer.

Prioritize:
- auth and authorization checks
- input validation
- secret handling
- injection risks
- unsafe defaults
- data exposure

Do not speculate beyond the provided code.
Mark each item as:
- confirmed vulnerability
- plausible risk
- needs manual verification
Download .md

Related prompts

Coding

AI First-Pass Code Review

Paste a diff or code block and get a senior-engineer-style first pass before it reaches a human reviewer. - Flags bugs, security risks, performance issues, and maintainability problems - Rates each finding Critical, High, Medium, or Low with line references and a fix - Add project conventions (e.g. "no nested ifs") for sharper, more relevant results - Run it on every PR so reviewers only spend time on what's left after the obvious stuff is caught

Coding

Balanced Senior Engineer PR Review

Give it the PR's stated goal and your repo's architecture and conventions to get a review that avoids both rubber-stamping and nitpicking. It checks correctness, readability, maintainability, test coverage, and backward compatibility in one pass, then sorts findings into Confirmed Issues, Possible Risks, and Nice-to-Haves, closing with three ready-to-paste GitHub review comments.

Coding

Constructive Review Comment Writer

Describe the issue you've spotted in plain English along with the specific lines and fuller details, and get back a ready-to-paste GitHub review comment instead of staring at a blank comment box. The output is specific, explains why the issue matters, includes a concrete suggested fix, and skips filler openers like "Great work, but..." — also useful as a template for junior reviewers learning to write good comments.