'receiving' 검색 결과

코드 리뷰 의견을 실제 코드와 지원 환경에 대조해 타당성을 확인합니다. 불명확한 내용을 정리하고 근거를 들어 답변하며, 수정 사항마다 테스트합니다.

• 모호한 리뷰 의견을 정리할 때
• 제안된 변경의 호환성을 확인할 때
• 추가하려는 기능의 실제 사용 여부를 조사할 때

Set up RuView sensing nodes by building and flashing ESP32 firmware, configuring WiFi and the receiving address, and checking serial logs. Diagnose missing CSI streams, the WiFi signal measurements sent by sensing nodes.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

• Setting up a new RuView sensing node
• Reflashing firmware for an 8 MB or 4 MB ESP32-S3
• Configuring WiFi and the receiving server

Process vendor bills from email, PDFs, or photos into proposed accounting entries and a payment plan. Checks duplicates, assigns accounts and jobs, matches purchase and receiving records, and requires separate approval for ledger entries and payments.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

• Organize accumulated email, PDF, and photographed bills
• Check duplicate invoices and purchase discrepancies
• Assign expenses to accounts and jobs

Receive live Lark/Feishu updates for messages, approvals, tasks, meetings, and more. Stream them as NDJSON, one JSON record per line, with filtering and time or event limits for bots and automated event processing.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

• Receiving new messages for bot processing
• Monitoring approval and task updates
• Receiving meeting lifecycle and minutes events

Set up Slack alerts for a colony, a group of AI agents, so users can reply when work stalls. The skill prepares the Slack app, stores sending and receiving tokens, connects a channel, and tests notifications.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

• Receiving Slack alerts when agent work stalls
• Replying from Slack to keep work moving
• Creating a dedicated notification channel

Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when receiving code review feedback (especially if unclear or technically questionable), when completing tasks or major features requiring review before proceeding, or before making any completion/success claims. Covers three practices - receiving feedback with technical rigor over performative agreement, requesting reviews via code-reviewer subagent, and verification gates requiring evidence before any status claims. Essential for subagent-driven development, pull requests, and preventing false completion claims.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions. Requires technical rigor and verification, not blind implementation.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when receiving code review feedback before implementing suggestions, especially when feedback is unclear, risky, disputed, or technically questionable.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Verifies review feedback with technical rigor, not blind agreement. Use when receiving review before implementing suggestions.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when receiving critical feedback on an analysis or manuscript, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or methodologically questionable - requires verification, not performative agreement or blind changes

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Process and act on code review feedback. Use when receiving review results.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when receiving code review feedback (especially if unclear or technically questionable), when completing tasks or major features requiring review before proceeding, or before making any completion/success claims. Covers three practices - receiving feedback with technical rigor over performative agreement, requesting reviews via code-reviewer subagent, and verification gates requiring evidence before any status claims. Essential for subagent-driven development, pull requests, and preventing false completion claims.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Always use this skill before claiming any work is done, fixed, passing, or complete — even if it seems obvious. Also use when receiving code review feedback from any source (human or automated), when finishing a task or major feature, before committing or creating a PR, or when about to express satisfaction with work. Covers three practices: receiving feedback with technical rigor (no performative agreement), triggering code review via /code-review command or cook/fix pipelines, and verification gates (run the command, read the output, then make the claim). Never skip — the cost of false completion claims is higher than the cost of verifying. References: code-review-reception.md, requesting-code-review.md, verification-before-completion.md.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Triage reviewer comments on a GitHub PR with receiving-code-review discipline — verify each against the codebase, then accept/push-back/clarify, and optionally reply in-thread. Use when responding to received PR feedback. NOT for giving a review (see mk:review-pr); NOT for implementing the fixes (hand off to mk:fix).

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.