feat: add code-review-checklist example skill for code review guidance

[AbhijitK20]

No description provided.

[AbhijitK20]

Merging? Review??

[codebuff-team]

Thanks for the contribution. A few concerns:

• The PR title says "add code-review-checklist example skill" but the diff adds three separate skills (api-design-review, code-review-checklist, testing-strategies). Please scope the PR to what the title describes, or explain the broader intent in the PR body (which is currently empty).
• These are pure documentation/prompt-template additions with no functional code, so there's nothing to test, but it's still worth confirming these follow the exact SKILL.md schema/conventions used by any existing skills in common/src/templates/initial-agents-dir/skills/ (if any precedent exists) - the diff doesn't show whether this directory previously had a skill index, registration step, or naming convention that needs to be respected. If a skill needs to be registered somewhere else (a manifest, README listing, etc.), that's missing here.
• Content quality is fine and generic (standard REST/testing/code-review advice), but it isn't obviously specific to Codebuff's actual workflows or tools beyond the generic read_files/code_search/run_terminal_command mentions repeated near-verbatim across all three files - worth checking whether this is genuinely useful guidance for the agent or filler.
• Since this is a squash-mirror, a maintainer would need to manually decide whether to port one, some, or all three skills - bundling unrelated skills under a mismatched title makes that harder to reason about and review.

Suggest splitting into one PR per skill (or renaming this PR to reflect all three), and clarifying in the body why these specific three skills were chosen and how they fit the existing skills directory conventions.

[codebuff-team]

Marking this stale - there has been no activity here for 29 days. It will close in 7 days unless someone comments.

This is backlog upkeep, not a verdict on the pull request. A single comment keeps it open, and anything closed this way can be reopened.

[victorxheng]

Apologies — this PR was auto-closed by GitHub when we force-pushed a history rewrite of this repository (repository maintenance; every commit SHA changed). That was not a judgment on this PR, and GitHub does not allow us to reopen it because the commits it was based on no longer exist in the new history.

If you'd like to continue with this change: rebase your branch onto the new main (or recreate it from a fresh clone) and open a new PR — feel free to link back to this one for context, and we'll pick up the review there.

Sorry for the churn, and thanks for contributing.