学術・技術文献を検索し、選定基準に沿って比較・統合するスキルです。検索履歴や除外理由を残し、根拠の強さと引用を確認したレビューにまとめます。
- 研究テーマの全体像を把握したいとき
- 検索手順を記録した文献レビュー
- 研究結果の矛盾や未解決課題の整理
1.5万 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
学術・技術文献を検索し、選定基準に沿って比較・統合するスキルです。検索履歴や除外理由を残し、根拠の強さと引用を確認したレビューにまとめます。
予測市場や取引エージェントの処理を、規約・データ品質・秘密情報・プライバシー・取引実行の観点で点検し、問題点と必要な対策を整理するスキル。
公開前の文章やコードを二つの独立したエージェントが同じ基準で審査し、両方の合格まで修正と再審査を繰り返し、上限を超えたら人へ判断を引き継ぐスキル。
Laravelアプリの認証・権限管理から、データ操作、フォーム、API、本番設定まで安全性を点検します。よくある脆弱性を避ける実装例を参考にできます。
H100やH200のGPU在庫を調べ、固定料金の見積もり依頼や調達状況を確認します。端末の認証解除と、明示的な許可に基づくノード検証にも対応します。
Flutter/Dartのコードを、状態管理ライブラリごとの慣習に沿ってレビューします。画面構成や非同期処理から、性能・テスト・アクセシビリティ・安全性まで点検します。
Djangoアプリのログイン、権限、入力処理、本番設定を点検します。不正な操作やスクリプト実行への対策から、ファイル投稿とAPIの保護まで見直すスキル。
AIが修正したコードで同じ不具合が再発しないよう、APIの必須項目や処理分岐を自動テストで確認し、テストとビルドを先に行うレビュー手順を整えるスキル。
12-agent academic paper writing pipeline. 11 modes (full/plan/outline/revision/revision-coach/abstract/lit-review/format-convert/citation-check/disclosure/rebuttal-audit). 6 paper types, 5 citation formats, bilingual abstracts, LaTeX/DOCX-via-Pandoc/PDF output. Style Calibration + Writing Quality Check + Anti-Patterns with IRON RULE markers. Triggers: write paper, academic paper, guide my paper, parse reviews, I got reviewer comments, revision roadmap, should we push back, conference rebuttal, grant panel response, audit my rebuttal, check my response draft, AI disclosure, check citations, citation check, check my references, verify references, look over the refs, 寫論文, 學術論文, 引導我寫論文, 審查意見, 我收到審查意見, 修訂路線圖, 評估回覆, 檢查引用, 引用檢查, 檢查參考文獻, 核對文獻, 논문 작성, 초록 작성, 논문 수정, 논문 계획을 도와줘, 심사 의견을 받았어, 심사 의견 반영, 답변서 점검, AI 사용 고지, 인용 확인, 인용 형식 검사, enmendar mi artículo, redactar artículo, guía mi artículo, analizar reseñas, auditar mi respuesta, verificar borrador de respuesta, verificar citas, divulgación de IA.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Orchestrator for the full academic research pipeline: research -> write -> integrity check -> review -> revise -> re-review -> re-revise -> final integrity check -> finalize. Coordinates deep-research, academic-paper, and academic-paper-reviewer into a seamless 10-stage workflow with mandatory, coverage-bounded integrity checks, two-stage peer review, and auditable quality-assurance artifacts. Triggers on: academic pipeline, research to paper, full paper workflow, paper pipeline, end-to-end paper, research-to-publication, complete paper workflow, 연구부터 논문까지, 연구 주제 설정부터 논문 완성까지, 논문 전체 워크플로, flujo de trabajo académico, investigación a artículo, flujo completo de artículo, pipeline de investigación completa, publicación de investigación, flujo de trabajo completo del artículo.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Draft, audit, or revise responses to peer review, revision cover letters, and marked-manuscript or LaTeX revision packages. Use for 审稿意见回复、逐点回复、返修信、 rebuttals and edits to existing response drafts. Initial-submission materials belong to nature-writing; simulated peer review belongs to nature-reviewer.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Orchestrates a GitHub PR review loop by delegating triage and implementation to dedicated sub-agents, then repeating until actionable review items are cleared. Use when the user says “address PR review”, “triage review comments”, or “iterate until review is clean”.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Watches what customers are saying in public and in private, then does something about it. Aggregates Google, Yelp, and Facebook reviews alongside disputes, tickets, and email into themes backed by verbatim quotes; drafts a reply to every review in the owner's own voice for approval; spots customers who have gone quiet or look likely to leave; and drafts win-back offers for the ones worth keeping. With Shopify connected, order and fulfillment patterns become a sentiment signal too. Works from pasted or exported reviews when nothing is connected. Use this whenever the owner asks about reviews, ratings, reputation, complaints, or repeat business — including "what are people saying about us," "did we get any bad reviews," "how do I respond to this one-star," "our rating dropped," "which customers have gone quiet," "who hasn't ordered in a while," "how do I win them back," or "are customers happy."
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Adversarial code review that breaks the self-review monoculture. Use when you want a genuinely critical review of recent changes, before merging a PR, or when you suspect Claude is being too agreeable about code quality. Forces perspective shifts through hostile reviewer personas that catch blind spots the author's mental model shares with the reviewer.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Boot, reopen, update, or reset OpenWork PR previews. Discover script worlds; choose preview-desktop (app only), preview-den (Den only), preview-full (Den plus desktop), or preview-app-web locally, on a private Daytona URL, or on Freestyle for hands-on testing.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Code review focused exclusively on over-engineering. Finds what to delete: reinvented standard library, unneeded dependencies, speculative abstractions, dead flexibility. One line per finding: location, what to cut, what replaces it. Use when the user says "review for over-engineering", "what can we delete", "is this over-engineered", "simplify review", or invokes /ponytail-review. Complements correctness-focused review, this one only hunts complexity.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Review an existing verdaccio/verdaccio pull request end to end — description, diff, review threads, CI, labels, changeset, release-line coverage — verify the findings, and report them; optionally fix them on the PR branch when asked. Use when given a PR number or URL to review, re-review, or "review and fix".
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Get a deep critical review of research from Claude via claude-review MCP. Use when user says "review my research", "help me review", "get external review", or wants critical feedback on research ideas, papers, or experimental results.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Get a deep critical review of research from an external reviewer backend (Codex or manual). Use when user says "review my research", "help me review", "get external review", or wants critical feedback on research ideas, papers, or experimental results.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Get a deep critical review of research from Gemini via gemini-review MCP. Use when user says "review my research", "help me review", "get external review", or wants critical feedback on research ideas, papers, or experimental results.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Autonomous multi-round research review loop. Repeatedly reviews using a secondary Codex agent, implements fixes, and re-reviews until positive assessment or max rounds reached. Use when user says "auto review loop", "review until it passes", or wants autonomous iterative improvement.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Shallow (quick) ensemble bug-finding review using 6 specialist agents in parallel. Each specialist reviews the same patch through a different lens: Logic & Types, Boundaries & I/O, Concurrency & State, Resources & Serialization, Absence Analysis, and API Completeness. Findings are merged and deduplicated. Best for: quick first-pass review of patches, triage of diffs, broad surface-level bug scan. For deeper file-focused review with full pattern catalogs and codebase investigation, use the deep-review skill instead.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Trigger: reviewer transport, advisory transport, review adapter, lens prompt/schema, OpenCode reviewer plugin, Codex reviewer, ReviewProviderContract. Enforce the shared Go advisory reviewer transport contract.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Runs an autonomous review-and-fix improvement loop over any code target — a skill, plugin, module, or directory — using a reviewer the user names: any installed skill or agent. Keeps a cross-round findings ledger, escalates when fixes stop converging, and guards scope mechanically. Use when asked to 'improve this code until review passes', 'run an improvement loop with <reviewer>', or to iterate review-and-fix with a specific reviewer. For skills prefer the skill-improver entry; for a branch prefer pr-improver.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。