「codex review」の検索結果

Consult Claude Code from Codex for a second opinion while Codex remains responsible for implementation and verification. Use when the user asks Codex to collaborate with Claude, consult Claude, ask Claude for a plan, get a Claude review, delegate analysis to Claude, or says "Claudeと一緒に", "Claudeに相談", "Claudeにレビューしてもらう", "Claudeの意見も聞く", or "Claudeと計画を立てる". Also use when an explicit independent planning or review pass from Claude would materially reduce risk on a complex coding task.

機能開発や大規模なコード整理、PRレビューをCodex、Claude Code、OpenCodeにバックグラウンドで任せ、進捗監視と完了通知まで扱うスキル。

• 機能開発をバックグラウンドで任せたいとき
• 別の作業場所で大規模なコード整理をしたいとき
• コーディングエージェントにPRレビューを頼みたいとき

複数の視点でまとめた重要な意思決定の草案に、Codexによる外部批評を一度追加します。結論の弱点や見落とし、反対意見の扱いを確認するスキルです。

• 判断が難しい重要な草案の検討
• 草案にない失敗の可能性の確認
• 強い反対意見の見落としの確認

機能追加やコード整理、プルリクエストのレビューをOpenAI Codex CLIに任せるスキル。長い作業の進捗確認や、複数の課題を並行して修正する手順も扱います。

• 既存プロジェクトに機能を追加したいとき
• 認証モジュールを整理したいとき
• プルリクエストをレビューしたいとき

The pre-merge review of a branch in a project that records its specs, decisions, and rules in .archcore/. Run this first for 'review my branch', 'review the changes before merge', or 'review before merge': it checks the changed code against the project's recorded canon and the changed documents against the code, and reports which side is wrong — spec-wrong or code-wrong; with no diff, it reports project health. A bug-hunting code review complements this review and does not replace it. Also use for 'show status', 'documentation gaps', 'check if docs match code', 'close out the feature', 'ship the feature and close it out', or after a staleness warning. Modes, named as the first word: drift for staleness detection, deep for a full documentation audit, closeout to close a finished feature, experience to capture a repeated pattern. Not for creating docs — use /archcore:document; not for planning — use /archcore:plan; not for a single-file edit with no branch 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。

Pull request lifecycle: commit, codex review, sync, review, fix, status, cleanup, and PR mining. Use when user wants to commit changes, get a second-opinion code review from Codex, push changes, create a PR, check PR status, fix review comments, clean up branches after merge, or mine tribal knowledge from PR reviews. Use for "commit my changes", "codex review", "push my changes", "create a PR", "pr status", "fix PR comments", "clean up branches", "mine PRs", or "address 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。

This skill should be used to spawn specialized OpenAI Codex CLI subagents for code review, debugging, architecture analysis, security audits, refactoring, documentation, comparative evidence adjudication, and autonomous /goal runs. It adds each persona through process-local developer instructions while preserving the project's AGENTS.md chain, including during parallel launches. Supports GPT-6-Astra across low, medium, high, xhigh, max, and ultra reasoning with default or priority service tiers, plus GPT-5.6 and GPT-5.5 models. Triggers on 'delegate to Codex', 'Codex Astra', 'Astra subagent', 'Codex subagent', 'code review agent', 'security audit', 'refactor with Codex', 'goal run', 'autonomous goal', 'have Codex weigh this'.

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。

N-round adversarial review pipeline for empirical research output — the chain from data to LaTeX tables to a manuscript that cites them. A Claude drafter proposes minimal diffs, a deterministic mechanical battery gates every diff from a clean state with a regression gate, a Codex reviewer files check-backed critiques, and a blind judge panel decides residual disputes. Manual-invoke ONLY: trigger when the user explicitly runs /adversarial-empirical-review or names 'adversarial-empirical-review' / 'adversarial empirical review'. Do NOT auto-trigger on generic 'review my results', 'check my tables', or manuscript-editing requests. For prose-style refinement use style-emulation instead; this skill AUDITS WHETHER THE TABLES ARE CORRECT — that each number in the tables is what the analysis code computes, reproduces from the data, and is internally consistent. It is an empirical + code review: the manuscript is read only to resolve table numbering, and prose is not examined.

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。

反復レビュー・ループ(codex-review-loop・fable-review-loop・opus-review-loop)が共有する判断ロジックの正本。起動可否ゲート・レビュアーの正体に依存しない大前提・常設観点・レビュー依頼に含める内容と含めてはならない内容・照合仕分け・終了判定・報告を定義する。内部専用でユーザーが直接使うものではない。

Codexへの単発の相談・調査・診断依頼を、ハング防止(watchdog)付きで実行する。反復・収束判定・コミットゲートは持たない。行き詰まって一回だけCodexに相談・調査を依頼したいときに使う。コミット前のレビュー収束が目的ならcodex-review-loopを使う。

Auto-review pipeline — reads the full CEO, design, eng, and DX review skills from disk and runs them sequentially with auto-decisions using 6 decision principles. Surfaces taste decisions (close approaches, borderline scope, codex disagreements) at a final approval gate. One command, fully reviewed plan out. Use when asked to "auto review", "autoplan", "run all reviews", "review this plan automatically", or "make the decisions for me". Proactively suggest when the user has a plan file and wants to run the full review gauntlet without answering 15-30 intermediate questions. (gstack) Voice triggers (speech-to-text aliases): "auto plan", "automatic 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。

Use when the user asks to process, triage, fetch, view, count, list, or resolve review feedback in a GitHub PR. Supports both CodeRabbit and Codex review workflows. In this workflow, “real review feedback” is strictly defined as actionable inline comments; for CodeRabbit, exclude review summaries and nitpicks, and for Codex, exclude review summary cards and use PR main-thread reactions only as status signals.

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, fix, answer, and reply to GitHub pull request review comments and conversation comments. Handles both change requests (fix or skip) and reviewer questions (explain using the rationale recalled from past Codex session history). Use when the user asks to "resolve PR comments", "fix review comments", "address PR feedback", "handle review comments", "address review feedback", "respond to PR comments", "answer review questions", or "address 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。

Run the Codex Optimized Development, Evaluation, and Remediation (CODER) Loop with an orchestration-only coordinator, non-overlapping task-family owners, fresh independent reviewers, evidence-scoped remediation, and final coordinator acceptance. Discover and compose optional MSW, Timebox, MSL, and Codex Voice Optimizer companions as the Slopware Dev Stack without making them dependencies. Use in Codex when the user invokes the CODER Loop, asks to divide a complex change into bounded implementation families with independent reviewers, requests multi-agent implementation without overlapping ownership, requires review and repair until every blocking gap is independently rechecked, asks for the CODER tutorial or Slopware Dev Stack, or wants CODER to install or use its companions. Do not trigger for an ordinary single-agent change, a review-only request, or a non-Codex host.

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。

Dispatch reviews to external companion AIs (Codex, Gemini, Claude) for an independent second opinion on code changes, PR readiness, doc completeness, architecture, or implementation status. Use when you want a fresh-eyes review beyond Claude-native. Trigger on "get a second opinion", "companion review", "review my changes", "review the PR". For Claude-only quality checks use /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。

Code review by several models at once — Claude sub-agents, OpenAI Codex, and a cheap third reviewer via OpenCode — reconciled into one report. Reviews whatever is named: a diff, a branch, specific files, one function, a legacy module, a whole repo. Use for any review request, a second or third opinion, a cross-check before a PR, or "code-review", "multi", "consensus 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。

Finalize an implemented rolling-wave slice for user review. Use when the user wants Codex to review the current branch state against a ready-for-review or in-review slice contract, confirm and fix required findings, repeat review and verification until no required findings remain, ask before accepting findings that materially change project shape or contradict project assumptions, record review state, and leave the clean slice in review for complete-slice.

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。

Cross-vendor code review: this agent reviews the other agent's diff and the other agent reviews this one's, so the final check always comes from a different model. Verdicts are APPROVE or REQUEST_CHANGES with file:line references. Triggers: "/codex-review", "cross-review this diff", "have the other vendor check this".

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。

Quality review of a change: is the logic right, is it safe, does it hold under real load, is risky code tested, is it fast enough, and is every line needed. Reads the connected code, not only the diff. Each finding is explained in plain English. Use for "review this", "code review", "review the last commit", "review my PR", "is this over-engineered", /ponytail-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。

別系統のモデル（Claude Code なら Codex、Codex なら Claude Code）に問題だけを渡して 独立に解かせ、自分の案と突き合わせる。実装前の設計判断や、同じ箇所で修正が 2 回続いて抜けられないときに使う。「セカンドオピニオン」「別のモデルに聞いて」 「他の見方」「行き詰まった」等で使用。コードレビューには使わない（/codex:review 等を使う）。

専門家エージェントの並行実行＋クロスレビューで実装・改善・レビューを行う高品質ワークフロー。「/forge」「forgeで」「専門家エージェントで実装して」、またはバグ修正の自前試行が1-2回失敗した時のエスカレーション先として発火。typo修正・数行の軽微変更には使わない。レビューのみ（修正・実装まで不要）なら cross-review、Codex単体レビューなら codex-review を使う。

ECCの導入・更新・再設定を、利用中のエージェント環境に合わせて進めます。導入状況の確認から変更内容のプレビュー、適用、検証までを対話形式で案内します。

• ECCを導入・更新したいとき
• Claude Codeで導入範囲を移したいとき
• Claude Codeでフックを調整したいとき

Get a deep critical review of research from an external reviewer backend (Codex or manual). 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. Repeatedly reviews using a secondary Codex agent, implements fixes, and re-reviews until positive assessment or max rounds reached. Use when user says "auto review loop", "review until it passes", or wants autonomous iterative improvement.

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。