「review」の検索結果

This skill should be used when user asks to "review a PR", "review pull request", "review this pr", "code review this PR", "check 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 a web app or page for visual design quality — layout, typography, spacing, colour, hierarchy, consistency, interaction patterns, and responsive behaviour. Not a UX audit (that checks usability) — this checks whether it looks professional and polished. Produces a design findings report with screenshots. Triggers: 'design review', 'does this look good', 'review the design', 'check the layout', 'is this polished', 'visual review', 'design audit', 'make it look better', 'it looks 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。

GitHub Actions security review for workflow exploitation vulnerabilities. Use when asked to "review GitHub Actions", "audit workflows", "check CI security", "GHA security", "workflow security review", or review .github/workflows/ for pwn requests, expression injection, credential theft, and supply chain attacks. Exploitation-focused with concrete PoC scenarios.

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 "perfection" review — hold a change to an *ideal* bar, not just a correct one, assuming eternal time, unlimited energy, and no ship pressure. Use when the user asks to review "for perfection", to make a defect "impossible to express", or to hunt where a defect "relocates" across review rounds. Grounds every claim in the diff, fans out adversarial verifiers via Workflow, and reports residual surfaces with a structural fix for each. ONLY invoke when the user explicitly asks for a perfection / ideal-bar 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。

Design review and validation workflow for KiCAD projects via MCP tools. Triggers on: "review my design", "check for errors", "audit", "DRC", "ERC", "find problems", "design review", "is this ready", "validate", "check my schematic", "check my PCB", "what's wrong", "run checks", "pre-fab 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。

Eng manager-mode plan review. Scope challenge, architecture review, code quality review, detailed test coverage diagram, performance review. Produces test plan artifact for downstream QA. Optional cross-model outside voice.

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 automation for TypeScript, JavaScript, Python, Go, Swift, and Kotlin. Analyzes PRs for complexity, risk, SOLID violations, and code smells. Use when reviewing PRs, analyzing code quality, or generating review checklists.

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。

NIL (Name, Image, and Likeness) contract analysis for NCAA student-athletes from the athlete's perspective. Use when user says 'review this NIL contract', 'analyze this NIL deal', 'check this athlete agreement', 'review my NIL agreement', or uploads a PDF NIL contract for review. Identifies red flags, missing protections, and compliance issues. Produces a structured review memorandum with negotiation positions. Do NOT use for general contract review, employment agreements, non-NIL endorsements, or brand-side deal analysis.

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。

Outside counsel guidelines (OCGs) — drafting, review, gap analysis, and targeted updates for in-house legal teams. Build new OCGs calibrated to maturity level (light, standard, comprehensive), review existing OCGs against 15-component best practice framework, add or update specific sections (AI policy, AFA terms, D&I, rate review), and produce GC briefing notes for internal buy-in. Trigger on: 'draft billing guidelines', 'outside counsel guidelines', 'OCG', 'billing expectations', 'review our guidelines', 'update the AI clause', 'what should our billing guidelines cover', 'we don't have billing guidelines', 'firms aren't following our guidelines', 'rate review terms', 'GC briefing on billing guidelines', 'AFA policy', 'block billing', 'prohibited fees', 'staffing expectations for outside counsel'.

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 the changes since a fixed point (commit, branch, tag, or merge-base) along two axes — Standards (does the code follow this repo's documented coding standards?) and Spec (does the code match what the originating issue/PRD asked for?). Runs both reviews in parallel sub-agents and reports them side by side. Use when the user wants to review a branch, a PR, work-in-progress changes, or asks to "review since X".

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 professional, empathetic responses to App Store reviews that build trust and turn critics into fans. Use when responding to negative reviews, drafting templates for common review types, or improving review management strategy.

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 Java concurrency code for thread safety, race conditions, deadlocks, and modern patterns (Virtual Threads, CompletableFuture, @Async). Use when user asks "check thread safety", "concurrency review", "async code review", or when reviewing multi-threaded 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。

Process and implement code review feedback systematically. Use when user provides reviewer comments, PR feedback, code review notes, or asks to implement suggestions from reviews.

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 diff or file through the Chisle lens: flag over-engineering, speculative abstractions, reinvented stdlib, and verbose code that a lazier approach would shrink. One finding per line, no praise. Use when the user says "chisle review", "review this for bloat", or invokes /chisle-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。

Dung khi can danh gia CON NGUOI trong team marketing dua tren du lieu — KPI scorecard theo tung vai tro writer, designer, media buyer; diem manh co vi du that; diem can cai thien; development plan 30-90 ngay; rubric cham 1-5. Kich hoat khi user nhac 'danh gia nhan vien', 'performance review', 'review nhan su', '1:1 review thang', 'nguoi nay lam duoc khong', 'co nen tang luong khong', 'feedback cho team member'. Khong dung cho — tong ket mot campaign thay vi con nguoi thi dung skill 63-campaign-retrospective; duyet chat luong mot output cu the thi dung skill 62-marketing-review; giao viec va dat deadline thi dung skill 64-team-brief.

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 a leader evaluates a marketing TEAM MEMBER using data — a KPI scorecard by role, strengths with real examples, areas to improve stated as observable behavior, a 30 and 90 day development plan, and a 1-5 rating rubric. Trigger on 'performance review for my marketer', 'evaluate a team member', 'monthly 1:1 review', 'feedback for my content writer', 'development plan for an employee', 'is this person underperforming'. Also use when the user is unhappy with someone and cannot articulate why. Not for — evaluating a campaign rather than a person, see `63-campaign-retrospective-global`; reviewing one piece of output, see `62-marketing-review-global`; scoring an external vendor, see `67-agency-vendor-brief-global`.

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 a finished DESIGN needs scoring and feedback — brand consistency, hierarchy plus readability plus accessibility, conversion elements, and platform fit, 10 points each, with per-issue feedback in issue, why, and how-to-fix form and a verdict of approve, minor fix, or redo. Trigger on 'design review', 'review this design', 'score this creative', 'is this design good', 'brand check on this banner', 'can we ship this or not'. Also use when the user just sends an image and asks for thoughts. Not for — reviewing copy and briefs, see `62-marketing-review-global`; writing the brief before production, see `42-image-brief-global`; the brand rules being checked against, see `46-brand-guideline-global`.

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。

Collect Amazon.com written product reviews at scale through Woot's public review AJAX route, retain every attempt and error log, reconcile partial runs, and normalize exact review text into auditable JSONL. Use for VOC, competitor review mining, low-star complaint analysis, listing research, or batch ASIN review acquisition without Amazon credentials. Amazon data layer of the bggg VOC suite (shared project folder; orchestrated by industry-orchestrator, reported by bggg-voc-report).

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 a phase plan should be peer-reviewed by other AI CLIs before execution, or the user asks for a cross-AI review. Invokes Gemini, Claude, Codex, or OpenCode and writes REVIEWS.md for /gsd-plan-phase --reviews.

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 the changes since a fixed point (commit, branch, tag, or merge-base) along two axes — Standards (does the code follow this repo's documented coding standards?) and Spec (does the code match what the originating issue/PRD asked for?). Runs both reviews in parallel sub-agents and reports them side by side. Use when the user wants to review a branch, a PR, work-in-progress changes, or asks to "review since X".

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。

Define a repository review policy fixing what each review pass checks, how severities rank, which paths are skipped, the nit cap, and who approves. Use when review findings feel inconsistent or noisy, or when tuning an automated 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。

Review a plan by running internal reviews and a peer review in parallel and returning combined findings. Use when the user asks to "review my plan", "check my plan", "critique my plan", or wants feedback on a plan.

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。

Critically assess external feedback (code reviews, AI reviewers, PR comments) and decide which suggestions to apply using adversarial verification. Use when the user asks to "evaluate findings", "assess review comments", "triage review feedback", "evaluate review output", or "filter false positives".

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 extremely strict maintainability review for abstraction quality, giant files, and spaghetti-condition growth. Use for a thermo-nuclear code quality review, thermonuclear review, deep code quality audit, or especially harsh maintainability 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。