bama
BAMA: Build Any Mac App. Agent skills to research, clone, design, build, optimize, and test native macOS apps with Swift and SwiftUI.
Free Claude Code skill. Three legendary personas review your code independently, then debate until consensus. Business, design, and engineering perspectives in one command.
SkillsPython · ShellGitHub @Atypical-ConsultingOnlineOwner unconfirmed
Have you tried it? One tap is enough. No sign-in needed.
No updates detected yet. GitHub releases will appear here.
Owners of public repositories under a personal GitHub account can sign in to verify ownership and manage the introduction themselves. No administrator approval is needed.
Sign in, generate a verification file, and commit it to this repository’s default branch within 30 minutes. Files on other branches or forks do not count. Then check the file below to manage the project without administrator approval. Keep the file to retain your access.
If needed, you will go to sign-in. After signing in, return here and press your chosen verification button again.
Run /nomorevibe verify in your project folder to verify ownership and manage the introduction yourself.
Verify in one minuteAsk about other verification options
AI code reviews by Elon Musk, Steve Jobs & Linus Torvalds. Three personas debate your code until consensus. Claude Code skill — install in 10 seconds.
Translation pending
Taken from the repository README
Loading the full README. The saved excerpt is shown below.
Code reviews by Elon Musk, Steve Jobs, and Linus Torvalds. They argue until they agree. One command. Three legendary perspectives. Zero mercy. Powered by Claude Code Skills.Read the full README ↗
One command. Three legendary perspectives. Zero mercy.
Powered by Claude Code Skills.
/elon-review, /jobs-review, /linus-review for solo perspectives, plus /legends-review to run all three with debate./legends-review runs solo reviews first, then has the three legends challenge, defend, and concede before producing a unified rating and top actions.reviews/<date>-<reviewer>/report.json (data), report.html (a self-contained interactive dashboard with filters, a done-checklist, and copy-paste fix prompts), and report.md (a diffable checklist for PRs).generate_report.py regenerates or merges several solo review JSONs into one combined HTML report.curl | bash installer that drops the skills straight into ~/.claude/skills/, no cloning or config required.skills/<skill>/evals/evals.json), and the shared report generator is covered by a golden test (tests/report-format/test.sh). Behavioral claims here are meant to be re-run, not taken on faith.curl -fsSL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Atypical-Consulting/claude-legends-review/main/install.sh | bash
That's it. No cloning, no config, no dependencies.
Open Claude Code in a repo with pending changes and invoke a reviewer:
/elon-review
Or run the full tribunal (requires CLAUDE_CODE_EXPERIMENTAL_AGENT_TEAMS):
/legends-review
Each run writes its findings to reviews/<date>-<reviewer>/. Open report.html in a browser for the
interactive dashboard, or regenerate/merge reports from the JSON at any time:
python3 ~/.claude/skills/legends-review/scripts/generate_report.py \
reviews/2026-07-23-elon/report.json reviews/2026-07-23-linus/report.json -o reviews/combined.html
/elon-reviewFirst-principles thinking. Business value. Speed. Deletion.
"Delete the abstraction layer. Ship without it. If someone screams, add it back."
Reviews through: complexity, performance, security, observability, maintainability, test coverage. Finds all problems (numbered, with severity). Scales depth to change significance. Asks: Should this exist? Could it be 10x simpler? What's the opportunity cost?
/jobs-reviewDesign obsession. Developer experience. Product vision. Taste.
"The API does what it's supposed to. It just doesn't sing."
Reviews through: API elegance, naming, DX, error messages, documentation, defaults, the last 10%. Finds all friction points (numbered, with impact). Scales depth to change significance. Asks: How does this feel? Would you be proud to demo this? Say no.
/linus-reviewEngineering rigor. Correctness. Abstractions. Maintainability.
"You've built an abstraction layer that adds complexity without removing any. Delete it."
Reviews through: correctness, abstractions, error handling, security, logging/observability, performance, readability, naming. Finds all bugs (numbered, with severity). Scales depth to change significance. Asks: Is this actually correct? What breaks at 3 AM? Show me the code.
/legends-reviewAll three. They review independently, then debate in character until consensus.
Step 0 → Framing pass (is this the right question? — before spending three agents)
Phase 1 → Solo review (no groupthink)
Phase 2 → Cross-review & debate (challenges, defenses, concessions)
Phase 3 → Consensus (unified rating, top actions, hard truths)
Produces a final report with:
Requires
CLAUDE_CODE_EXPERIMENTAL_AGENT_TEAMSenabled in settings.json.
Every review — solo or legends — also lands on disk as reviews/<date>-<reviewer>/:
report.json — the findings as data (severity, category, file:line, recommendation, effort)report.html — a self-contained, actionable dashboard generated from the JSON:
done-checklist persisted across reloads, severity/reviewer/category filters,
a copy-paste fix prompt per finding (drop it straight back into Claude Code),
markdown export of what's left, light/dark themereport.md — a diffable checklist for PRs and issuesThe HTML is never hand-written — regenerate it anytime from the JSON, or merge several solo reviews into one combined report:
python3 ~/.claude/skills/legends-review/scripts/generate_report.py \
reviews/2026-07-23-elon/report.json reviews/2026-07-23-linus/report.json -o reviews/combined.html
🏛️ LEGENDS REVIEW — CONSENSUS REPORT
Reviewed by: Elon Musk 🔥 · Steve Jobs 🍎 · Linus Torvalds 🐧
┌──────────┬────────┬──────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Reviewer │ Rating │ Verdict │
├──────────┼────────┼──────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ 🔥 Elon │ 7/10 │ "Ship it, but delete the middleware layer." │
│ 🍎 Steve │ 6/10 │ "Someone cared about this. Now care about the │
│ │ │ error messages too." │
│ 🐧 Linus │ 8/10 │ "The error handling is correct. That's rarer │
│ │ │ than you think." │
└──────────┴────────┴──────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Consensus Rating: 7/10
Where They Agreed:
• Delete the middleware abstraction — it creates complexity without removing any
• Error messages need a complete rewrite for developer experience
• Add integration tests before shipping
Where They Fought:
• Elon wanted to delete the validation layer; Linus insisted it prevents
a class of runtime errors. Linus won.
The Hard Truths:
🔥 "The architecture is fine. The velocity is not."
🍎 "This is a collection of endpoints, not a product."
🐧 "This will break at 3 AM and whoever is on call will curse your name."
git clone https://github.com/Atypical-Consulting/claude-legends-review.git
cp -r claude-legends-review/skills/* ~/.claude/skills/
Most AI code review tools give you one perspective. Legends Review gives you three — and makes them argue.
Built for developers who use Claude Code and want more than "LGTM" on their pull requests.
/legends-review: Agent Teams experimental feature enabledMIT — do whatever you want.
Track progress and proposals in the open issues.
Contributions are welcome. Open an issue first to discuss any significant change.
git checkout -b feat/my-feature)git commit -m 'feat: ...')