Results for “rev”

Simulate a Nature-style reviewer assessment from the referee perspective rather than an author rebuttal. Use when the user wants a pre-submission review, reviewer report, peer-review style critique, novelty/significance/technical soundness assessment, reviewer-style manuscript evaluation, 审稿人视角评估, 预审稿意见, or Nature reviewer report. Return 3 reviewer reports plus a cross-review synthesis, grounded only in the local Nature reviewer source basis. Also trigger on general pre-submission review requests during academic writing even without the word "Nature", such as getting a mock peer review for any journal, critiquing a draft as a reviewer would, assessing novelty/rigor before submission, and Chinese phrasings like 审稿人视角、模拟审稿、预审、帮我审一下论文、投稿前自审、审稿意见模拟、找论文问题.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

review-all を実行し、指摘内容をコードに反映、bun run c / bun run lint / bun test で自己検証し、CONVERGED/NOT_CONVERGED の収束判定付き完了レポートを /tmp/arima-review-fix-result.md に出力する。レビュー→修正→検証→レポートを一気通貫で行うスキル。スコープ引数は /review-all と同じ（wt / PR #N / vs:<branch> / range / ファイル列挙）。review-fix-loop からの自動呼び出し（mode=non-interactive）にも対応。Use when user says 'レビューして直して', 'review and fix', '自動修正', 'レビュー反映', or when invoked by review-fix-loop.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Review a GitNexus pull request for production readiness with seven coordinated reviewer agents. Combine their findings and have a final critic check the draft, producing a review without editing code or posting results.

• Reviewing a GitNexus pull request before production use
• Combining findings from multiple reviewer agents
• Checking a review draft before finalizing it

Collect and validate the review state of a GitHub pull request, then generate a readable Markdown report, a text summary, and a list of items to address before review triage begins.

• Collecting the current review state of a pull request
• Summarizing unresolved threads and review comments
• Preparing review items for subsequent triage

Coordinate GitHub pull request reviews by assigning comment triage and code changes to dedicated sub-agents. Repeat the process, track decisions and progress, and reply to and resolve threads as fixes are completed.

• Work through outstanding pull request review comments
• Separate required fixes from items outside the pull request scope
• Repeat review and implementation until actionable items are cleared

Re-review a pull request after new commits arrive. Check every previous finding, inspect the new changes for regressions, and review the full current change. Run relevant verification and publish a test report and review verdict within Factory.

• Checking whether previous review findings were addressed
• Finding regressions introduced by follow-up commits
• Re-running tests against the current PR head

Improve research through repeated Gemini reviews, code changes, experiments, and analysis. The workflow records full feedback and actions, then stops when both the score and readiness criteria are met or the round limit is reached.

• Improving research through repeated external reviews
• Implementing and checking fixes for research weaknesses
• Keeping a complete record of reviews and experiments

Organize paper reviews into individual concerns and draft responses within venue limits. Track evidence, unanswered issues, and approved commitments, then produce reviewer replies and a revision checklist that can be updated during follow-up rounds.

• Planning responses to multiple reviewers
• Drafting a rebuttal within a character limit
• Preparing separate replies for reviewer threads

Write Chinese code review feedback that clearly distinguishes required fixes, suggestions, and optional advice. Use question and suggestion templates, organize review summaries, and follow guidance for mixed Chinese-English comments and commit messages.

• Writing Chinese review comments with clear priorities
• Rephrasing blunt feedback as questions or suggestions
• Standardizing Chinese-English comments and commit messages

Review the scope and process of Apache Pinot changes, including pull request descriptions, reverts, retries, and compatibility notes. Use it to examine large changes, test workarounds, and documentation needed for changes that break backward compatibility.

• Reviewing large changes across multiple modules
• Reviewing Revert or Hotfix pull requests
• Checking retries and sleeps added to tests

Review existing R scripts for code quality, reproducibility, domain correctness, and coding standards. Produce a separate report for each script, plus a severity-based summary of findings and the three most critical issues, without changing source files.

• Checking whether an analysis script is reproducible
• Reviewing R code against coding conventions
• Auditing several related R scripts

Get a simulated peer review of a paper, abstract, or selected sections. Receive assessments of originality, methods, results, and writing, with specific revision suggestions, severity ratings, and a prioritized checklist for improving the manuscript.

• Run a simulated peer review before submitting a paper
• Check whether methods and conclusions are adequately supported
• Review an abstract for novelty and clarity

Organize pull request reviews by selecting eligible labeled or explicitly named requests and distributing them to a dedicated worker pool. It records selection decisions and limits concurrent reviews, with two worker sessions by default.

• Reviewing a selected list of pull requests
• Processing a labeled review queue with limited concurrency
• Checking code owner conditions before scheduling reviews

Review pull requests, branches, or uncommitted changes across eight areas, including security, correctness, and tests. Verify findings against the code, group problems by type, and assess whether the change needs redesign or smaller fixes.

• Reviewing a pull request across eight areas
• Checking local changes before submission
• Challenging findings with thorough verification

Provides comprehensive code review guidance for React 19, Vue 3, Angular 17+, Svelte 5, Rust, TypeScript, Java, Java 8, PHP, Ruby, Rails, Python, Django, FastAPI, Go, C#/.NET, Kotlin, Swift, Dart, Flutter, NestJS, C/C++, Zig, CSS/Less/Sass, Qt, and more. Covers architecture review, performance review, security audit, code quality anti-patterns, and common bugs across all ecosystems. Use when: reviewing pull requests, conducting PR reviews, code review, reviewing code changes, establishing review standards, mentoring developers, architecture reviews, security audits, performance reviews, checking code quality, finding bugs, giving feedback on code.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Monitor PR review comments and automatically classify and address reviewer feedback including code changes, questions, and nits. Use when handling PR reviews, addressing reviewer comments, responding to code review feedback, or automating review resolution. Triggers on handle reviews, PR review, address feedback, reviewer comments, code review, review response.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Plan, draft, and revise academic papers with support for literature reviews, bilingual abstracts, citation checks, and responses to reviewers. The skill also formats manuscripts for publication requirements and produces Markdown, LaTeX, DOCX, or PDF outputs.

• Planning a paper’s structure and evidence
• Drafting a manuscript and bilingual abstracts
• Turning reviewer comments into a revision plan

Coordinate a research project from topic exploration to a final manuscript. The skill connects research, writing, integrity checks, review, and revision workflows, tracks deliverables, and records progress with user confirmation at stage boundaries.

• Taking a research topic through to a final manuscript
• Resuming a workflow from an existing draft or reviewer comments
• Tracking checks, revisions, and the paper creation process

Let the host AI agent review Git changes while ocr selects files and resolves review rules. Receive findings grouped by severity, plus coverage details showing which files were reviewed or skipped and why.

• Reviewing changes with the current AI agent
• Checking branch differences or a single commit
• Reviewing files against their applicable rules

Draft self-assessments, peer reviews, and feedback for managers using concrete examples of work and collaboration. Organizes achievements around context, actions, and results, matches your writing voice, and flags sections that need more evidence or detail.

• Prepare an annual or mid-year self-assessment
• Draft a peer review with specific examples
• Write constructive feedback for a manager

Review completed code changes against the original requirements, choosing review depth by behavioral risk. Coordinate independent reviewers, resolve actionable findings, and verify that the delivered changes match the content actually reviewed.

• Review completed changes before final verification
• Choose review depth based on behavioral risk
• Re-review fixes after actionable findings

Re-review a GitLab merge request after new commits, track the outcome of every previous finding, and inspect both new changes and the full proposal. Verify the current code, then publish a test report and review verdict.

• Re-reviewing a merge request after fixes
• Tracking the resolution of earlier review findings
• Checking new commits for regressions and incomplete fixes

Review a GitLab merge request linked to a Factory work item, verify the current commit, and publish findings with a test report. It records the review verdict on the card and prepares a session handoff without merging.

• Review a GitLab merge request assigned through Factory
• Verify earlier review findings against the current commit
• Publish test results and an evidence-based verdict

Review revenue plans through six questions covering pipeline coverage, win rates, customer revenue retention, sales rep ramp time, discounts, and lead sources. Produce a structured assessment of gaps and three concrete actions before committing targets or expanding sales.

• Review assumptions before committing a quarterly revenue target
• Find pipeline stages where win rates are weakening
• Separate retention, contraction, and expansion in customer revenue