← ClaudeAtlas

slop-coplisted

Judge whether a pull request is reviewable by a human, covering title and description value, claims the diff contradicts, splittable scope, and filler content. Use before requesting, accepting, or merging review rather than for correctness defects or prose wording.
yarlson/yarstack · ★ 3 · Code & Development · score 76
Install: claude install-skill yarlson/yarstack
# Slop Cop Decide whether a human can review a pull request as submitted, and name the added content that gives the reviewer nothing. ## Scope 1. Confirm the target pull request or comparison scope. Read the title, body, linked issue, commit messages, changed paths with line counts, and the diff. Use the repository's GitHub CLI for a remote pull request and the local branch diff otherwise. 2. Stop or qualify the review when the scope cannot be isolated or the diff is unavailable. 3. Judge only from the diff, the pull request text, repository conventions, and available check evidence. When a claim cannot be checked, report it as unverified rather than accepted. ## Gate 1 — Title Fail the title when it names no subject or change, carries only a ticket identifier or type prefix, describes work the diff does not contain, or names only part of what the diff changes. ## Gate 2 — Description signal The description must supply what the diff cannot: the problem, why the change happens now, decisions and rejected options, risk, and how the author verified the result. A reviewer who has not seen the branch must be able to answer what to look at first and what breaks if the change is wrong. Judge the answers, not the word count. Fail the description when it: - restates the diff file by file or function by function; - pads with repeated headings, emoji section banners, overlapping bullet lists, or untouched template checklists; - claims quality with words such as comprehensive, r