「rev」の検索結果

Turn an incoming set of findings — from an AI reviewer, a referee report, a code review, a linter, or a second model — into verified fixes, without letting a confident misread damage correct work. Every finding is a CANDIDATE until checked against the actual source. Use whenever you receive review comments, audit findings, or a critique you did not write yourself, especially when the reviewer is a model or when the volume is too large to check by feel.

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。

Multi-agent comprehensive slide review (visual + pedagogy + proofreading, plus TikZ / parity / substance conditionally). Use when user says "full review", "excellence pass", "comprehensive check", "review everything", "pre-release review", "slide excellence", or before teaching / shipping a deck. Fanout wrapper — for a single lens, use `/visual-audit`, `/pedagogy-review`, or `/proofread` directly.

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, approve, request changes on, or reject pending wiki edit drafts in Arkon. Requires editor or admin role. Triggers on: review drafts, pending reviews, check draft queue, approve draft, reject draft, request changes, send draft back, review wiki changes.

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 Chinese annual self-review (述职报告 / 年终总结) for a performance cycle: results against OKR or KPI with evidence, the two or three things that mattered most, honest lessons, and next year's plan, in the form Chinese employers expect. Use when asked 帮我写年终总结, 写述职报告, 年度绩效自评, 半年总结, or a year-end review in Chinese. Produces the review in Chinese, a one-page summary for the presentation, a data appendix, and likely questions from 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。

Generate a tailored code review checklist for any pull request based on the language, type of change, and risk level. Use when asked to review code, check a PR, review a pull request, or generate a code review checklist. Produces a focused checklist with language-specific checks, risk-level-appropriate depth, and a clear approve/request-changes recommendation.

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 pull request or diff like a thoughtful senior engineer — prioritized, kind, and focused on what matters. Use when reviewing code, giving PR feedback, or asked to 'review this change'. Produces a structured review: a correctness/design pass, comments ranked by severity (blocking → nit), what's done well, and a clear approve / request-changes call — feedback that improves the code and the author.

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。

Closeout pass on a finished substantive change — sequence refactor-clean (shape), code-review (diff), and write-docs (docs) so all three run, in the order where each feeds the next. Use after implementing a slice or feature and before calling it done or committing; when the user asks for a final review, a cleanup-and-document pass, or to "review everything." For a diff-only audit, reach code-review directly.

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。

可审计的 agent 团队：BMAD 全自动研发流水线编排器。编排 9 个专业 Agent（PM、架构师、UI Designer、Tech Lead、Scrum Master、Frontend、Backend、QA、DevOps）从需求到部署，每一步都有事件溯源 + 不可绕过门禁 + 确定性 eval——可验证测试真跑、门禁真过。支持单环节切片命令（/boss:plan /review /qa /ship）与无 CLI 纯 Markdown 降级。 Triggers（全流水线）: 'boss mode', '/boss', '全自动开发', '从需求到部署', '帮我做一个', 'build this', 'ship it', '全流程', '自动化开发', '一键开发', 'start a project', 'new feature' Triggers（单环节切片，对存量项目最常用）: - /boss:review — '帮我评审', '代码评审', '技术评审', '看看这段代码有什么问题', '风险评估', 'review this', 'review my PR', 'code review' - /boss:qa — '跑一下测试', '补测试', '检查质量', '测试覆盖够不够', '门禁过了吗', 'run the tests', 'check quality', 'add tests' - /boss:plan — '先出个方案', '写个 PRD', '设计一下架构', 'write a spec', 'plan this feature' - /boss:ship — '可以发布了吗', '部署检查', 'ready to ship', 'deploy checks' Does NOT trigger: - 单文件修改或简单 bug 修复（直接编辑即可） - 纯代码阅读或解释（使用 read 工具） - 已有 pipeline 正在运行时的重复启动 - 极小事（预计 <30 分钟人工可完成、不需要 PRD/架构/门禁记录） Output: 完整项目代码 + PRD/架构/UI/测试/部署文档，写入 .boss/<feature>/ 目录

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 generated or changed WordPress code — plugins, themes, and blocks — before it ships. Best used reactively after an agent writes, edits, or reviews code touching WordPress APIs: add_action/add_filter, shortcodes, meta boxes, AJAX handlers, REST routes, WP_Query or $wpdb, widgets, or WP-CLI commands. Use on 'review this plugin', 'is this safe to ship', 'make this translatable', 'speed up this query', or after tasks like 'write a plugin' or 'add an endpoint/shortcode/meta box'. Enforces escaping and sanitization, nonces plus capability checks, prepared database queries, core-API-first development, translation-ready strings, and query/caching discipline. DO NOT USE for WooCommerce-specific order, product, or checkout logic (use woo-guard), non-WordPress PHP, generic code quality review (use clean-code-guard), test code review (use test-guard), server or hosting configuration, or conceptual WordPress questions.

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 generated or changed WooCommerce code — extensions, payment and shipping integrations, checkout customizations, and order/product logic — before it ships. Best used reactively after an agent writes, edits, or reviews code touching WooCommerce APIs: wc_get_order, wc_get_orders, wc_get_product, WC() cart or session, woocommerce_* hooks, Store API endpoints, payment gateways, order or product meta, HPOS, subscriptions, or bookings. Use on 'review this Woo plugin', 'is this HPOS compatible', or after tasks like 'write a WooCommerce extension', 'add a checkout field', 'hook into the order flow', or 'update stock'. Enforces HPOS-safe order access, CRUD over direct meta, feature-compatibility declarations, server-side checkout validation, money-handling discipline, and hooks over template overrides. DO NOT USE for WordPress code without WooCommerce APIs (use wp-guard), generic code review (use clean-code-guard), test review (use test-guard), or store configuration and admin-screen questions.

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 generated or changed test code against universal testing rules before it ships. Best used reactively after an agent writes, edits, generates, or refactors tests, before presenting, committing, or merging them. Use for pytest (test_*.py, *_test.py), PHPUnit/Pest (*Test.php), Jest/Vitest (*.test.ts, *.spec.js), Go (*_test.go), files under tests/, __tests__/, or spec/, and review requests like 'write tests for X', 'add tests', 'test this', 'review these tests', or PR diffs containing tests. Can also guide test writing when explicitly invoked before the work. This skill is the quality gate that prevents AI-generated test bloat. DO NOT USE for production or implementation code review (use clean-code-guard), CI or test-runner configuration, running or debugging tests, or general architecture discussion.

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 explaining or planning around ACM CCS peer review, the two-cycle HotCRP workflow, decision categories including minor revision, the rebuttal window, the adversarial reviewer pool, ethics and disclosure scrutiny, meta-review dynamics, and ACM proceedings outcomes.

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 reasoning about the ACM MM (ACM Multimedia) review pipeline — thematic-area routing to reviewers and area chairs, the OpenReview double-blind process and its single-blind track exceptions, the optional anonymous rebuttal, the meta-review and decision, and the oral/poster and award tiers, and where an author actually has leverage.

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 reasoning about how an ACL paper travels through ACL Rolling Review and conference commitment, covering reviewer and area-chair roles, meta-reviews, the commitment decision by senior area chairs and program chairs, Findings versus main-conference outcomes, ethics review escalation, and resubmission strategy across cycles.

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 drafting the revision and response letter after an Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) revise-and-resubmit — structuring point-by-point responses to the action editor and reviewers across a multi-round developmental process. Drafts the response after revisions; it does not interpret the decision letter (amj-review-process).

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。

Optimize App Store product pages for search visibility and conversion. Use for App Store Optimization (ASO), keyword research, app name/subtitle/keyword-field strategy, conversion-focused descriptions and promotional text, screenshot captions and ordering, Custom Product Pages with assigned search keywords, In-App Events, Product Page Optimization tests, localized metadata, ratings/review strategy, and in-app review prompt timing with RequestReviewAction or AppStore.requestReview. Also use when routing ASO vs App Store review, privacy/ATT, or StoreKit implementation boundaries.

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 user asks to "fetch overleaf review comments", "address overleaf reviews", "apply overleaf comments", "review my overleaf paper", "sync overleaf feedback to local", "what comments are on my overleaf doc", or wants to act on Overleaf reviewer feedback in a local git-tracked LaTeX 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。

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。