swiftdata-code-review

$npx mdskill add existential-birds/beagle/swiftdata-code-review

Reviews SwiftData code for model design, queries, concurrency, and migrations

  • Identifies issues related to @Model, @Query, @ModelActor, and VersionedSchema in SwiftData files.
  • Deploys references from the Quick Reference table for detailed guidance on each issue type.
  • Decides findings based on the presence of SwiftData keywords and adherence to best practices.
  • Delivers results as actionable feedback within the codebase through comments or annotations.

SKILL.md

.github/skills/swiftdata-code-reviewView on GitHub ↗
---
name: swiftdata-code-review
description: Reviews SwiftData code for model design, queries, concurrency, and migrations. Use when reviewing .swift files with import SwiftData, @Model, @Query, @ModelActor, or VersionedSchema.
---

# SwiftData Code Review

## Quick Reference

| Issue Type | Reference |
|------------|-----------|
| @Model, @Attribute, @Relationship, delete rules | [references/model-design.md](references/model-design.md) |
| @Query, #Predicate, FetchDescriptor, #Index | [references/queries.md](references/queries.md) |
| @ModelActor, ModelContext, background operations | [references/concurrency.md](references/concurrency.md) |
| VersionedSchema, MigrationStage, lightweight/custom | [references/migrations.md](references/migrations.md) |

## Hard gates (before reporting findings)

Run in order; do not assert an issue until the gate for that issue passes.

1. **Scope — pass when:** You have the target `.swift` path(s) and confirmed SwiftData surface in scope (e.g. `import SwiftData`, `@Model`, `@Query`, `@ModelActor`, `VersionedSchema`, or migration types). If none apply, stop or narrow scope with one sentence.
2. **Reference — pass when:** For each checklist area you evaluate (models, queries, concurrency, migrations), you opened the matching `references/*.md` from the Quick Reference table **or** wrote `N/A: no <area> in this review` with a one-line reason.
3. **Evidence — pass when:** Every finding uses the `[FILE:LINE] ISSUE_TITLE` header (line range allowed) from the file you read; no finding without a cite.
4. **Report — pass when:** Findings list cites first (or inline) using `[FILE:LINE] ISSUE_TITLE`, then severity or checklist grouping—no uncited assertions.

## Review Checklist

- [ ] Models marked `final` (subclassing crashes)
- [ ] @Relationship decorator on ONE side only (not both)
- [ ] Delete rules explicitly set (not relying on default .nullify)
- [ ] Relationships initialized to empty arrays, not default objects
- [ ] Batch operations used for bulk inserts (`append(contentsOf:)`)
- [ ] @Query not loading thousands of items on main thread
- [ ] External values in predicates captured in local variables
- [ ] Scalar comparisons in predicates (not object references)
- [ ] @ModelActor used for background operations
- [ ] PersistentIdentifier/DTOs used to pass data between actors
- [ ] VersionedSchema defined for each shipped version
- [ ] MigrationPlan passed to ModelContainer

## When to Load References

- Reviewing @Model or relationships -> model-design.md
- Reviewing @Query or #Predicate -> queries.md
- Reviewing @ModelActor or background work -> concurrency.md
- Reviewing schema changes or migrations -> migrations.md

## Review Questions

1. Could this relationship assignment cause NULL foreign keys?
2. Is @Relationship on both sides creating circular references?
3. Could this @Query block the main thread with large datasets?
4. Are model objects being passed between actors unsafely?
5. Would schema changes require a migration plan?

More from existential-birds/beagle

SkillDescription
adr-decision-extractionUse when you need to mine a conversation, session transcript, or design discussion for architectural decisions before writing ADRs. Identifies problem-solution pairs, trade-off debates, technology choices, and explicit \"[ADR]\" tags. Triggers on \"what decisions did we make\", \"extract decisions from this chat\", \"find the choices in our discussion\", or \"summarize architectural decisions\". Also useful after long planning sessions to capture decisions that were made implicitly. Does NOT write ADR documents \u2014 use adr-writing or write-adr for that.
adr-writingUse when writing or formatting an ADR document using the MADR template, applying Definition of Done (E.C.A.D.R.) criteria, or verifying ADR completeness. Triggers on \"write the ADR\", \"format as MADR\", \"check ADR quality\", \"mark gaps in ADR\". Also triggers when a decision has been extracted and needs to become a document. Does NOT extract decisions from conversations (use adr-decision-extraction) or orchestrate the full extract-confirm-write workflow (use write-adr).
agent-architecture-analysisUse when auditing an agent codebase against the 12-Factor Agents methodology, reviewing LLM-powered system architecture, or assessing agentic app compliance. Triggers on \"analyze agent architecture\", \"12-factor audit\", \"how compliant is this agent\", or \"evaluate this LLM app\". Also applies when comparing frameworks or planning agent improvements. Not for quick checklists \u2014 this performs deep per-factor codebase analysis with file-level evidence.
app-intents-code-reviewReviews App Intents code for intent structure, entities, shortcuts, and parameters. Use when reviewing code with import AppIntents, @AppIntent, AppEntity, AppShortcutsProvider, or @Parameter.
artifact-analysisUse when the user wants a cited, structured read of local documents and project knowledge. Triggers on: \"analyze these docs\", \"scan my project for context\", \"read the docs folder\", \"summarize what's in .beagle/concepts/\", \"extract context from docs/\", \"what's in this folder\", \"go read everything in X and tell me what's there\". Also invoked programmatically by other beagle skills (prfaq-beagle Ignition, brainstorm-beagle reference points, strategy-interview context grounding) via the companion contract. Does NOT trigger on codebase lookups (\"find this function\", \"search the repo\"), web research (use web-research), LLM-as-judge evaluation (use llm-judge), or document editing (use humanize-beagle). Produces a written scan plan, parallel-subagent findings, and a cited synthesis report on disk — never inline prose, never unsourced claims.
axum-code-reviewReviews axum web framework code for routing patterns, extractor usage, middleware, state management, and error handling. Use when reviewing Rust code that uses axum, tower, or hyper for HTTP services. Covers axum 0.7+ patterns including State, Path, Query, Json extractors.
brainstorm-beagleUse when the user has a fuzzy idea and wants to shape it into a concrete project spec before planning or building. Triggers on: \"brainstorm this\", \"I have an idea for...\", \"help me think through this project\", \"what should I build\", \"spec this out\". Also catches vague feature descriptions needing structured questioning to clarify scope. Does NOT write code, plan implementation, review strategy docs, or run strategy interviews \u2014 produces a WHAT/WHY spec through dialogue, not a HOW plan.
bubbletea-code-reviewReviews BubbleTea TUI code for proper Elm architecture, model/update/view patterns, and Lipgloss styling. Use when reviewing terminal UI code using charmbracelet/bubbletea.
cloudkit-code-reviewReviews CloudKit code for container setup, record handling, subscriptions, and sharing patterns. Use when reviewing code with import CloudKit, CKContainer, CKRecord, CKShare, or CKSubscription.
combine-code-reviewReviews Combine framework code for memory leaks, operator misuse, and error handling. Use when reviewing code with import Combine, AnyPublisher, @Published, PassthroughSubject, or CurrentValueSubject.