1,036 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Evaluate design from a UX perspective, assessing visual hierarchy, information architecture, emotional resonance, cognitive load, and overall quality with quantitative scoring, persona-based testing, automated anti-pattern detection, and actionable feedback. Use when the user asks to review, critique, evaluate, or give feedback on a design or component.
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。
Babysit a GitHub pull request after creation by continuously polling review comments, CI checks/workflow runs, and mergeability state until the PR is merged/closed or user help is required. Diagnose failures, retry likely flaky failures up to 3 times, auto-fix/push branch-related issues when appropriate, and keep watching open PRs so fresh review feedback is surfaced promptly. Use when the user asks Codex to monitor a PR, watch CI, handle review comments, or keep an eye on failures and feedback on an open PR.
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。
Método da Anthropic para treinar IA inofensiva através de auto-aprimoramento. Abordagem em duas fases - aprendizado supervisionado com auto-crítica/revisão, depois RLAIF (RL from AI Feedback). Use para alinhamento de segurança, redução de outputs prejudiciais sem rótulos humanos. Alimenta o sistema de segurança do Claude.
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。
Use at a cognee hackathon. Watches the participant's experience with cognee throughout the session — errors, slowness, confusion, workarounds, and signs of frustration in how they work with you — and keeps one private feedback file they send to the cognee team at the end.
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。
Use when designing or implementing feedback, status, progress, alerts, errors, success states, and live activity indicators in Apple-platform apps — inline status, banners, alerts, notifications, and loading states.
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。
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
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。
AID Memory System for session feedback, learning cycles, and skill improvement. Manages state, feedback collection, and improvement analysis. Load for /aid-init, /aid-start, /aid-status, /aid-end, /aid-improve, /aid-memory, /aid-reset.
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。
Process the batch of incoming Bridge Classroom feedback. Pull open `classroom-feedback` issues from the PBS repo, cluster them by defect class, verify each against the actual board, and fix at the right altitude — patch a single board, or (when a class recurs) build a gate, sweep the whole corpus, and regenerate/drop collectively. Engine bugs route to the Classroom repo; bridge-judgment calls go to Rick. Nothing leaves the machine without David's OK. Invoke as `/issue` (optionally with an issue number or scenario to restrict the run).
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。
Evaluate design from a UX perspective, assessing visual hierarchy, information architecture, emotional resonance, cognitive load, and overall quality with quantitative scoring, persona-based testing, and actionable feedback. Use when the user asks to review, critique, evaluate, or give feedback on a design or component.
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。
Evaluate design from a UX perspective, assessing visual hierarchy, information architecture, emotional resonance, cognitive load, and overall quality with quantitative scoring, persona-based testing, and actionable feedback. Use when the user asks to review, critique, evaluate, or give feedback on a design or component.
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。
Jevを使い、日本語中心・英語対応で文書、メール、メッセージ、提案書、技術資料、スライドの抽出テキストを多角的にレビューする。AIっぽさ、定型的な文体、冗長さ、直訳調、過剰敬語などを評価し、根拠引用と具体的な改善案を作成担当者へ返して改善ループを回すときに使う。Japanese-first bilingual editorial style review with Jev scores, source-grounded feedback and bounded revision loops; not an AI-authorship detector.
Use when evaluating a completed or in-progress project across scope, correctness, quality, testing, and learning outcomes using structured Praise-Critique-Grow feedback.
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。
Triage TestFlight crashes, beta feedback, and performance diagnostics using asc. Use when the user asks about TF crashes, TestFlight crash reports, beta tester feedback, app hangs, disk writes, launch diagnostics, or wants a crash summary for a build or app.
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。
Bei vorhandenem und ausdrücklich autorisiertem lokalem Entscheidungsprofil: wiederkehrende Entscheidungen aus belegtem Feedback vorhersagen, Konfidenz kalibrieren und Vorhersage, Entscheidung und Ausführung strikt trennen.
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。
Builds DRAFT user personas from the research notes, interview summaries, survey free text and support themes the user provides: for each persona the goals, pains, jobs to be done, context of use, quotes exactly as supplied with their participant codes, and the evidence count behind every attribute, with names, demographics and any detail no participant stated left UNKNOWN rather than invented. Use when the user asks to "build personas from these interviews", "who are our users based on this research", "draft user personas", "turn these research notes into personas" or "update our personas with the new interviews". Do not use for theming a batch of customer feedback into counts, use customer-feedback-theme-synthesis instead; for exit interviews, use exit-interview-synthesis; for the requirements those personas imply, use product-requirements-draft. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Drafts a DRAFT self-assessment, peer feedback note or manager review narrative from the evidence the writer supplies (goals, examples, metrics, notes), in the review template where given: every sentence tied to a numbered evidence item, unsupported claims removed and logged, and a gaps list to complete before submitting. Never assigns, suggests or implies a rating, score, ranking, pay or promotion outcome. Use when the user asks to "write my self-assessment", "draft peer feedback for a colleague", "turn these notes into a performance review", "help me write the year-end review for my report", "summarise my achievements against my goals" or "draft the mid-year review". Do not use for a job description or role profile, use job-description-drafter instead; for a new hire's first 90 days, use onboarding-plan-builder. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Reqordのデータモデル（Requirement, Specification, ProjectContext, Feedback）とCLI操作ルールの共通知識ベース。
Use when the user asks to "triage our comments, DMs, and mentions", "draft replies to this thread", "can we repost this fan post", or "set up inbox SLAs and an escalation path"; produces a ranked triage queue with register detection (sincere / ironic / performative / parasocial, sentiment-inversion table included — "this is so bad" under a comedy register is praise), a commenter taxonomy (troll monitor-only / rager / misguided / unhappy-customer / advocate) with a response-tier ladder and per-channel SLAs, an escalation matrix ending at the crisis path, a moderation ladder plus house rules for owned spaces, and a UGC curation-and-rights mode whose dated permission entries route to the channel registry — every reply is a ranked DRAFT a human posts; nothing is ever auto-sent. Not for launch-window feedback triage — use launch-feedback-synthesizer. 评论私信提及分诊/语域识别/回复草稿/UGC授权
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。
差分が「その差分自身を審査するレビュー基準・品質ゲート」を弱めていないかを diff-time で検出する。Check 1 レビュールールの削除・弱体化（.river/rules.md / .river/rules.d/*）、Check 2 実行時コンフィグの閾値・ゲート緩和（.river-review.{json,yaml,yml} の review.severity 引き下げ / exclude 拡大 / memory.suppressionEnabled 無効化 / selection.skills.exclude 追加）、Check 3 suppression entry の新規追加、Check 4 lint・静的解析設定からのルール削除や無効化、Check 5 branch protection・required check の緩和、の 5 Check を対象とし、これらが機能変更と同一 PR に混在し、かつ意図の宣言が無い場合に指摘する。report-only。workflow の permissions / action pin は gha-workflow-security、既存 suppression entry の使い分けは suppression-feedback、設定ファイルの一般的妥当性は config-json、.only / .skip / @ts-ignore / @ts-nocheck は heuristic-review.mjs の決定論検出器、リファクタと機能追加の混在は behavior-structure-separation へ委譲する
River Review のメインエントリポイント。 レビュー依頼の intent classification → 専門 skill 選択 → 実行 → finding verification → feedback classification → fixture / reference / suppression への還元までを束ねる improvement-loop orchestrator。
Expert en developer advocacy (communauté, contenu, docs, demos, feedback loop, métriques)
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。
Expert en agents avec boucle humaine (workflows d'approbation, escalade, intégration feedback, supervision)
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。
Precise language for design feedback. Ban vague words. Name what you actually see. Use when giving design feedback, running critiques, or training teams to communicate about quality.
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。
Search and analyze Reddit discussions for market research, product feedback, and community insights using Xpoz. Use when asked to "search Reddit", "what does Reddit think about X", "Reddit feedback on X", "subreddit analysis", or "Reddit market research".
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。