790 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Use ARIS, the Auto Research in Sleep skill-based research harness, for setup, workflow routing, reviewer backend integration, state recovery, experiment operations, and repository maintenance.
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。
Decide when to delegate to Honey's read-only subagents (hive-scout, hive-reviewer) instead of working inline, so the expensive tokens — large file reads and review passes injected back into the orchestrator's context — come back compressed (Honey Lever 3). Use when a task is search-heavy or review-heavy, spans many files, or you want to keep the orchestrator's context small. Not for trivial one-file work.
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。
Audit preparation register: required document, period covered, request and receipt dates, preparer and reviewer, auditor queries and adjustments. Use for assembling an audit 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。
360 feedback register: reviewer, subject, review cycle, visibility, due date and score, as CSV, SQL, JSON Schema or Notion on request. Use for 360 reviews or peer feedback 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。
Adversarial code review using the opposite model's CLI. Spawns 1–3 reviewers on the opposing model (Codex sessions typically spawn Claude; Claude sessions spawn Codex) to challenge work from distinct critical lenses. Triggers: "adversarial 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。
Adversarial code review using the opposite model. Spawns 1–3 reviewers on the opposing model (Claude spawns Codex, Codex spawns Claude) to challenge work from distinct critical lenses. Triggers: "adversarial 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。
Create GRACE 4 worker and reviewer subagent presets that understand .grace artifacts, scopes, assertions, and verification evidence.
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 GRACE 4 integrity across .grace artifacts, active changes, scopes, assertions, code anchors, and verification evidence.
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 practices with technical rigor and verification gates. Use for receiving feedback, requesting code-reviewer subagent reviews, or preventing false completion claims in pull requests.
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。
Automate 7-phase feature development with specialized agents (code-explorer, code-architect, code-reviewer). Use for multi-file features, architectural decisions, or encountering ambiguous requirements, integration patterns, design approach errors.
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。
When handing work to the Codex CLI earns its cost, and how to size the run: second-model review, bounded implementation hand-offs, sandbox permissions, model and reasoning effort. Use when the user asks for Codex or `codex exec`, when a change is complex or high-stakes enough that an independent reviewer would change the outcome, or when a delegated run needs its model, effort, or permissions chosen. For agents other than Codex itself.
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。
Refine a Stage2 ARR (ACL Rolling Review) rebuttal draft into polished, reviewer-facing prose in the author's style; preserve factual grounding, optionally prepend a courteous opening phrase, and normalize tables/code/formulas into Markdown.
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。
Refine a Stage2 ICLR rebuttal draft into polished, reviewer-facing prose in the author's style; preserve factual grounding, optionally prepend a courteous opening phrase, and normalize tables/code/formulas into Markdown.
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。
Fill a Stage5 final remarks template using condensed discussion markdown from all reviewers and optional rating changes. Use when generating final remarks after Stage3/Stage4 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。
Refine a Stage2 NeurIPS rebuttal draft into polished, reviewer-facing prose in the author's style; preserve factual grounding, optionally prepend a courteous opening phrase, and normalize tables/code/formulas into Markdown.
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。
Verification guide for citations added during rebuttal writing. Use when Stage 2 responses introduce new references, when the Area Chair asks about a cited paper, or when any citation in the rebuttal might have been AI-generated. Prevents the serious credibility damage of fabricated references in reviewer-facing documents.
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-stage rebuttal analysis skill for RebuttalStudio. Use when organizing reviewer comments into stage-specific conference workflows, including stage1 breakdown, stage2 refinement, stage4 multi-round follow-up, and stage5 final remarks generation.
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。
Base template for Stage1 reviewer-comment breakdown. Use when creating or extending conference-specific Stage1 skills (for example ICLR, ICML, NeurIPS, ACL) so shared extraction, splitting, and response-mapping logic stays consistent.
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。
Refine a Stage2 ICML rebuttal draft into polished, reviewer-facing prose in the author's style; preserve factual grounding, optionally prepend a courteous opening phrase, and normalize tables/code/formulas into Markdown.
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 strategy guide for RebuttalStudio. Use when developing response strategies for reviewer comments, deciding how to classify concerns, or choosing between Accept/Defend/Clarify/Experiment approaches at any stage of the rebuttal pipeline.
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 quality check for a completed rebuttal document before submission. Use after Stage 3 document compilation or after Stage 5 final remarks writing to verify completeness, tone, factual accuracy, and structural integrity. Catches common rebuttal errors before they reach reviewers.
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 Go design spec before implementation begins - dispatch a subagent that checks a design doc for completeness, consistency, and idiomatic Go (simplicity, small consumer-defined interfaces, explicit wrapped errors, context propagation) plus Cobra/Viper conventions where applicable. Use when a user has a Go spec to review, asks "is this spec ready?", or is about to implement from a written design. Distilled from spf13/go-skills and adapted to this repo's conventions.
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 and operate bounded multi-agent workflows with task decomposition, dependency graphs, ownership, handoff contracts, shared-state controls, approvals, recovery, and synthesis. Use when a task contains genuinely independent workstreams, specialized roles, parallel research or implementation, reviewer-worker loops, or coordination problems that one agent should not execute sequentially.
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。
AI code reviewer grounded in classic software engineering books for catching design smells, coupling issues, and architectural risks.
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。