「review」の検索結果

Review code changes for correctness, clarity, and potential issues. Use when the user asks for a review, code review, PR review, or wants feedback on a diff or file.

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 a verdaccio diff, branch, or pull request against the repository review guide (security first, then npm-client compatibility, performance, product fit, maintainability), verify each finding against the code, and report actionable issues. Use for code reviews and for reviewing your own changes before or during a PR workflow.

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 GPT using a secondary Codex agent. 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 using MiniMax API. Use when you want to use MiniMax instead of Codex MCP for external review. Trigger with "auto review loop minimax" or "minimax 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。

ARS-Codex research, writing, manuscript review, study screening, and experiments. Use for deep research, literature or systematic reviews, meta-analysis, research questions, drafts, revisions, roadmaps, abstracts, citations, integrity checks, peer review, research-to-paper. Screen records: sr-screener. Citation triggers: check citations, look over the refs, 檢查引用, 檢查參考文獻, 인용 확인, 인용 형식 검사. Korean: 논문 심사, 논문 수정, 초록 작성, 체계적 문헌고찰, 연구부터 논문까지. Español: revisión de literatura, revisar artículo, enmendar mi artículo, escribir resumen, investigación a artículo. Also use for ARS aliases: /ars-plan, /ars-outline, /ars-abstract, /ars-lit-review, /ars-citation-check, /ars-disclosure, /ars-format-convert, /ars-3w, /ars-revision-coach, /ars-revision, /ars-reviewer, /ars-mark-read, /ars-unmark-read, /ars-cache-invalidate, /ars-rebuttal-audit, /ars-full. Prompts, references, templates, and contracts live under ars/.

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。

Full launch review against your framework and risk calibration. Use when the user says "review this launch", "legal review for [feature]", "can we ship this", "what are the legal issues with [product]", or references a launch tracker ticket or PRD that needs a category-by-category review memo.

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。

Termination review — high-risk flag detection, severance + release, and final pay timing by jurisdiction. Jurisdiction-specific rules and release consideration periods are researched per review, not stored. Use when the user says "reviewing a termination", "can we fire this person", "term review", or describes a termination scenario.

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。

Gets independent code reviews from Codex or Antigravity for uncommitted changes, branch diffs, and commits. Use when the user requests an external review, a second opinion on code, a codex review, a gemini review, an antigravity review, or /second-opinion.

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。

Trustpilot company profile lookup on trustpilot.com — input a company domain (e.g. apple.com, shopify.com, shopwagandtail.com) and extract company metadata: official display name, businessUnitId, TrustScore (1-5), star rating, total review count, last-12-months review count, primary category and all categories, verification flags (verifiedByGoogle, verifiedPaymentMethod, verifiedUserIdentity), claimed/closed status, website URL, contact info (email, phone, country, city, address, zip), profile image, and optional reply behavior metrics (averageDaysToReply, replyPercentage, negativeReviewsWithRepliesCount, companyUsesAIResponses). Detects company-not-found and returns isCompanyFound=false with the searched domain. Use when user mentions Trustpilot company info, Trustpilot TrustScore, look up Trustpilot rating, check Trustpilot stars, Trustpilot business profile, Trustpilot review count, Trustpilot company lookup, Trustpilot verification status, Trustpilot reply percentage, Trustpilot AI responses, business unit ID Trustpilot, get company rating from Trustpilot, scrape Trustpilot company, batch enrich domains with Trustpilot, bulk company info Trustpilot, fast domain enrichment with TrustScore, Trustpilot company metadata, Trustpilot brand monitoring, competitor TrustScore comparison, trustpilot.com domain enrichment, trustpilot company profile, trustpilot domain check, trustpilot business listing, check if company is on Trustpilot, Trustpilot category lookup, company contact info from Trustpilot. Also applies to lead-list enrichment with reputation scores, supplier vetting, agency or KOL vetting via review reputation, aggregator sites that need TrustScores for many domains, due-diligence workflows, and pre-outreach reputation checks.

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 point-by-point reviewer response letters for Nature-family manuscript revisions. Use when the user provides reviewer comments, editor decision letters, revision notes, response drafts, or asks how to respond to major/minor revision requests, rebuttal letters, response to reviewers, peer-review reports, 审稿意见回复, 逐点回复, 修回信, 大修回复, 小修回复, or 如何回复 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。

This skill should be used when the user asks to review a diff or pull request, write review comments, audit code quality, establish review standards, or improve how a team performs code 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。

Systematic review response workflow from comment analysis to professional rebuttal writing. Use when the user asks to "write rebuttal", "respond to reviewers", "draft review response", or "analyze review comments". Improves paper acceptance rates.

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。

Simulates academic peer review, evaluating papers across Originality, Methodology, Results, and Writing to provide Major/Minor Revision recommendations with actionable feedback. Triggers when a user asks to "review my paper," "simulate peer review," or "give my paper a peer 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。

Compute the EXACT sub-transaction impact of a rollup rule in TRES Finance — every filter applied — and flag genuine problems (zero matches, overlap, config mistakes) before the rule is created. Two modes. Mode A: a pre-create quality gate invoked by the tres-rollup-rules skill to vet proposed candidate rules. Mode B: standalone review of a rule someone submitted or of existing PENDING rules. Trigger this skill when the user says "review this rollup rule", "what would this rollup rule actually match", "preview the rollup impact", "how many transactions would this rule catch", "is this rollup rule valid", "validate my rollup rule", "check my pending rollup rules", or "review the rollup requests". Do NOT use this to design or propose new rollups — that is tres-rollup-rules. This skill only measures impact and flags issues; it never executes mutations.

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。

Systematic review response workflow from comment analysis to professional rebuttal writing. Use when the user asks to "write rebuttal", "respond to reviewers", "draft review response", or "analyze review comments". Improves paper acceptance rates.

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。

Systematic Review Pipeline Orchestrator - Coordinates systematic literature review automation Manages the complete 7-stage PRISMA 2020 pipeline from research question to RAG system Delegates to specialized agents (I1, I2, I3) while enforcing human checkpoints Use when: conducting systematic reviews, building knowledge repositories, PRISMA automation Triggers: systematic review, PRISMA, literature review automation

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。

This skill should be used when the user asks to review a diff or pull request, write review comments, audit code quality, establish review standards, or improve how a team performs code 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。

Comprehensive manuscript review covering argument structure, econometric specification, citation completeness, and potential referee objections. Make sure to use this skill whenever the user wants substantive academic feedback on a paper — not just surface edits. Triggers include: "review my paper", "give me feedback on this draft", "what would a referee say", "anticipate referee objections", "act as a referee", "check my identification strategy", "is my argument convincing", "review this manuscript", "critique my paper", "will this pass review", or any request for deep critique of academic writing beyond typos and grammar.

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 R code review protocol on R scripts. Checks code quality, reproducibility, domain correctness, and professional standards. Produces a report without editing files. Make sure to use this skill whenever the user wants their existing R code evaluated or audited — not when they want new analysis written. Triggers include: "review my R script", "check my R code", "is my code replication-ready", "audit this R file", "does this code follow conventions", "will this reproduce", "check my analysis script", "code review", "review-r", or when the user has an existing .R file and wants quality feedback rather than new code.

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。

Recommend AND run open-source AI tools, agents, Claude Code / Codex skills, and MCP servers for any stage of a literature review — searching, reading, extracting, synthesizing, screening, citation-checking, and paper writing. Use when the user asks "what tool should I use to..." OR "install/run/use <tool> to ..." for research/lit-review work: automating a survey or related-work section, PDF→Markdown extraction for LLMs (MinerU/marker/docling), PRISMA / systematic review (ASReview), citation-backed Q&A over PDFs (PaperQA2), wiring papers into Claude/Cursor via MCP (arxiv/paper-search/zotero servers), or chatting with a Zotero library. Ships a launcher (scripts/litrun.py) that installs each tool in an isolated venv and runs it. Curated catalog of 70+ vetted projects. 支持中英文（用于「文献综述工具选型」与「一键安装/运行」）。

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 complete academic literature survey from scratch using multi-agent orchestration. Searches academic databases (OpenAlex, CrossRef, Unpaywall), downloads PDFs, builds BibTeX, drafts a LaTeX review, compiles it, reviews for quality, and revises based on feedback — all automated. Use this skill whenever the user asks to "generate a literature review", "write a survey paper", "review recent papers on [topic]", "create a survey of [field]", "综述", "文献综述", "survey papers in top journals", or wants a multi-agent pipeline to produce a publishable-quality literature review. Also trigger when the user wants to search multiple journals for papers on a topic and synthesize findings into a structured document. Works for any academic field but optimized for economics journals.

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 whether a design is SOUND — solving the right problem, derived from its stated goals and constraints — and emits ranked, evidence-backed findings, not edits. Read when asked to 'review this design', 'is this design sound', 'pressure-test this proposal', 'do a design review', 'does this solve the right problem', 'poke holes in this spec', 'should we build this', or to critique a proposal / spec / ADR / architecture or product decision. Do NOT read when the user wants to AUTHOR one of these — routing a new proposal is frame-a-proposal, a spec is write-a-spec, a decision record is record-a-decision, a postmortem is write-a-postmortem. Do NOT read for code review of a diff, or to fact-check individual claims (that is a correctness pass, a different job).

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。

Drive ONE already selected open pull request in microsoft/apm to mergeable. Classifies copilot-pull-request-reviewer[bot] inline review, runs autopilot-pr-review-worker, folds (by default) every recommendation inside the PR's stated scope, pushes to the head branch or a superseding PR that preserves authorship via commit trailers, watches CI to green (`agent-merge` when that skill or `<agent_merge_state>` is present; otherwise `gh pr checks --watch`), and iterates under fixed caps until ready-to-merge, advisory-with-deferred, superseded, or blocked. Plan before any fold, push, or reviewer request. Never spawned by autopilot-pr-review-scheduler. That scheduler is advisory only. Invoke this skill by name when the caller asked to drive a PR to merge.

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 a git diff or explicit file scope for reuse, code quality, efficiency, clarity, and standards issues, then optionally apply safe Codex-driven fixes. Use when the user asks to "simplify code", "review changed code", "check for code reuse", "review code quality", "review efficiency", "simplify changes", "clean up code", "refactor changes", or "run simplify".

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。