「review」の検索結果

Run an independent peer review via Claude. Use when the user asks to "peer review", "peer review my code", "peer review my plan", "get a second opinion", or "independent review".

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。

Run an independent peer review via Codex. Use when the user asks to "peer review", "peer review my code", "peer review my plan", "get a second opinion", or "independent review".

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。

Posts review findings from a JSON file as inline comments on a GitHub Pull Request, attaching each comment to its file and line. Use when you have a list/JSON of review findings (each with a file path, line number, and a message such as summary/failure_scenario) and want them published on a PR as inline review comments. Triggers include "post these review comments on the PR", "associate comments to files in the PR", "publish review findings to 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。

Generate a PR description from the current branch's changes against a GitHub PR, using the gh CLI. Use when writing, drafting, or updating pull request descriptions, PR summaries, or PR bodies. Does not review code or post review comments — use code-review for local review or post-code-review-to-pr for posting a review to GitHub.

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。

Run a comprehensive code review on local source files. Use this skill when the user asks to review, audit, inspect, evaluate, or check code, even if they never use the word "review." Does not post comments to GitHub pull requests — use post-code-review-to-pr for that. Does not analyze architectural structure or module boundaries — use architectural-analysis for that. Does not explain code or a PR to build understanding before reviewing — use code-overview for a written overview, or code-walkthrough to be paced through it one step at a time. Does not map bounded contexts or domain boundaries — use ddd-analysis for that. Does not capture feedback on Han's own skills — use han-feedback for that.

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。

Run a full pull request review and post review comments directly to the current branch's GitHub PR. Requires the gh CLI to be installed and a PR to already exist for the current branch. Use when you want review feedback posted to GitHub as PR comments. For local code review without posting to GitHub, use code-review instead. Does not write or update PR descriptions — use update-pr-description for that.

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。

Deep behavioral audit of a Lattice skill — proposes 3 review personas relevant to the skill, runs independent scenario analysis from each persona's perspective, then merges only the high-confidence, practical findings into a severity-ordered gap report with proposed fixes. Structural validation (conventions, cross-references) is skill-validate's job — this skill finds gaps that would realistically surface when someone actually uses the skill: missing scenario handling, ambiguous instructions, silent failure cases, and behavioral inconsistencies. Filters out theoretical edge cases, low-likelihood speculation, and findings owned by other skills. Use after writing or significantly changing any skill, or when the user says 'review this skill', 'deep review', 'does this skill work', 'find gaps in this skill', 'stress test this skill', 'review from different angles', or 'skill review'. Standalone — does not call other skills.

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。

Perform a structured code review by composing validation checklists from relevant atoms based on what code changed. Loads atoms conditionally -- clean-code always, architecture/DDD/security/tests only when the delta touches their domain. Produces a severity-ordered report with specific locations and fixes. Use when the user asks to 'review this', 'code review', 'quality check', 'validate the code', 'check my code', 'review the delta', or 'review this 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。

Review code changes for correctness, security, performance, and code quality. Use when the user asks to review a diff, review code changes, review commits, or perform a code review. Input can be: (1) a text diff pasted directly, (2) one or more git commit hashes to extract the diff from, or (3) a git range like abc123..def456. The user may also provide task description or requirements that motivated the change.

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。

Run the Incan review/fix loop end to end: review, fix actionable findings, and review again until clean or blocked. Use when the user wants an autonomous review-and-repair pass or says /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。

Review PyTorch pull requests for code quality, test coverage, security, and backward compatibility. Use when reviewing PRs, when asked to review code changes, or when the user mentions "review PR", "code review", or "check this 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。

Review other contributors' PRs to learn the codebase and build maintainer trust. Guides structured diff reading, helps formulate review comments, and teaches how to distinguish blocking issues from nits. Use when you want to learn a codebase by reviewing PRs, build trust with maintainers before contributing code, or practice code review on OSS repos. Not for reviewing your own PR — use oss-submit-pr for that.

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 reviewing, debugging, or improving frontend code in this repo (website/ HTML, CSS, JS, service workers, PWA assets) or when asked to "review frontend", "revisa el html/css", "review JS", or "audita el frontend". Reviews for correctness, browser compatibility, accessibility, performance, security (XSS), responsive behavior, and PWA/service-worker correctness, and ends with a "what a user/reviewer would catch" pass.

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 reviewing, debugging, or giving feedback on Go code in this repo (exercises/part2, website/tools, or any *.go file) or when asked for a "code review", "review this Go", "revisa este código Go", or "crítica de código". Reviews for correctness, idiomatic Go, error handling, resource cleanup, concurrency, performance, and security, and always ends with a test-thinking pass (what a test would catch). For exercises/part2, prefer the go-exercise-reviewer skill which knows the module-mode quirk; this skill covers general Go anywhere in the repo.

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 the user asks for a code review by a fleet of specialized reviewer agents, wants multiple independent reviewer perspectives, or asks to run reviewers in single-pass or iterative fix-until-clean mode. Launches focused subagents for correctness, security, architecture, conventions, simplicity, UX, reliability, telemetry, testing, compatibility, and documentation review.

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。

Run a Duck Critic producer-critic loop: you (main) keep producing the plan/code/tests and gate your own work at checkpoints with a different-model critic, revising until it passes. Use when asked for rubber duck, ラバーダック, 別モデルレビュー, second opinion, critic, or a different-model code review, design review, plan critique, or review by another model/agent harness. Not for readability refactoring or code cleanup alone.

Create or review a reusable skill (SKILL.md) that packages a workflow, and decide whether the request should be a skill instead of a prompt, instruction, agent, or hook. Use when creating a new skill, extracting a workflow from a conversation, updating an existing skill, reviewing SKILL.md quality, or fixing weak skill triggering. Triggers on "create skill", "/create-skill", "new skill", "review skill", "fix skill trigger", "SKILL.md", "スキル作成".

Operate a reusable technical book manuscript workspace with writing structure, reader persona SSOT, review rules, and optional Markdown to Re:VIEW/PDF support. Use when organizing a book manuscript repo, defining or reviewing target readers, standardizing chapter/section files, setting writing/review agents, handling publisher proof comments, or assessing an existing writing workspace. Triggers on book writing workspace, reader persona, reader audience, 読者ペルソナ, persona SSOT, technical book project, 執筆ワークスペース, manuscript workflow, Re:VIEW workspace, proof PDF, annotated proof, publisher proof comments, 校正, 校正注釈, and 初校.

Evaluate and review GO-CAM (Gene Ontology Causal Activity Model) activities / annotons — molecular-function typing, has-input, causal relations, complexes, evidence — and check their consistency with gene annotation reviews. Use when reviewing cached GO-CAMs under gocams/, filling a GoCamReview YAML (gocams/<id>/<id>-review.yaml), or grounding a module in GO-CAM models.

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。

Reviews audio DSP and audio processing code for realtime safety violations. Use whenever the user asks to review, audit, or check audio processing code — including plugin process callbacks, audio engine render functions, DSP implementations, or any code that runs on the audio thread. Trigger on phrases like "review my processBlock", "check this DSP code", "is this safe for the audio thread?", "review my JUCE plugin", or when you see an audio callback and spot potential realtime violations. Flag issues proactively even when the user hasn't explicitly asked for a review.

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。

Pre-commit code quality review for Unity C# code. Checks against Rules, CODING_STANDARDS.md, NAMING_CONVENTIONS.md, and GDD Gherkin test coverage. Use when code has been written and tests are passing but before committing. Runs automatically at Step 8.5 of /uw-cmd-implement-feature. Triggers on "review this code", "check my implementation", "pre-commit review", "code review", "check before commit", "is this ready to commit", "review my changes", or any request to validate code quality before committing.

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。

Security-focused code review identifying high-confidence exploitable vulnerabilities with two-axis severity/confidence scoring, OWASP 2025 alignment, per-finding Haiku verification, and false positive filtering. Optional GitHub PR posting. Use when user runs /security-review, /review:security-review, requests a "security review", "security audit", "vulnerability scan", or mentions "find vulnerabilities", "check for exploits".

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。

Write a literature review. Use when the user says "literature review", "lit review", "review the literature", "summarize prior research", "what does the research say about", "synthesize research on", "background section", "related work section", "what has been studied on this topic", or needs to systematically identify, synthesize, and critically evaluate existing research on a topic - even if they don't explicitly say "literature review".

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。