From f3f02a393a27a3c30490efe3fa5be79b3967644e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Julian Lechner Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2026 19:12:02 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] docs(skill): clarify performance review triggers --- shared/skills/reviews/performance-review/SKILL.md | 14 +++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/shared/skills/reviews/performance-review/SKILL.md b/shared/skills/reviews/performance-review/SKILL.md index 0403631..621dcf2 100644 --- a/shared/skills/reviews/performance-review/SKILL.md +++ b/shared/skills/reviews/performance-review/SKILL.md @@ -1,10 +1,18 @@ --- name: performance-review -description: Review changes for meaningful performance risks. +description: Use when evaluating a code change for likely latency, throughput, memory, allocation, or resource-use regressions; distinguish measurements from estimates. --- # Performance Review -Identify measurable or plausible bottlenecks in the changed paths. +Use when reviewing a change for meaningful latency, throughput, memory, or resource-use risk. -Return evidence, expected impact, and proportionate recommendations. Avoid speculative optimization. +## Review + +1. Identify the changed execution paths and their expected frequency, input size, and concurrency. +2. Trace expensive work such as repeated I/O, network calls, database round trips, allocations, serialization, locks, and scans. +3. Estimate algorithmic cost and resource growth with realistic data sizes. Separate measured results from reasoned estimates. +4. Check whether a proposed cache, parallelism, or batching change preserves invalidation, ordering, cancellation, and failure behavior. +5. Recommend a benchmark or profiler only when it can answer a concrete uncertainty. Avoid micro-optimizations without a plausible user impact. + +Report the affected path, evidence, likely impact, and smallest useful correction or measurement. Do not present theoretical concerns as confirmed regressions.