「review」の検索結果

Use when surfacing architectural friction and proposing deepening refactors (shallow modules → deep modules) for testability and AI-navigability. Triggers on "improve architecture", "find deepening opportunities", "where is this codebase shallow", "architecture review". Emits structured candidates + precise patches; delegates ALL rendering to mk:preview. NOT for diagram/HTML rendering (see mk:preview); NOT for trade-off deliberation (see mk:party); NOT for plan critique (see mk:plan-ceo-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 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。

Generates comprehensive, context-aware code review checklists tailored to the specific codebase, programming language, and team standards. Analyzes PR diffs and suggests what reviewers should focus on.

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。

他の開発者のGitHub PRを下読みしてレビューコメント案を作り、人間が承認した内容だけを保留(PENDING)レビュー経由で投稿する。自作PRの修正ループには codex-pr-review-loop / claude-pr-review-loop を使う。

上线前 PR 审查。分析当前分支与基础分支的 diff，检查 SQL 安全、竞态条件、 LLM 信任边界、枚举完整性等测试捕获不到的结构性问题。发现问题直接修复。 触发方式：用户说"review"、"审查代码"、"上线前检查"、"forge-review"，或 forge-dev --full 调度。 与内置 code-review/verify 的分工：forge 工作流内的上线前结构性审查用本 skill；用户点名 /code-review 或 /verify 时用对应内置 skill。

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。

レビュー専用サブエージェント(fable-reviewer・opus-reviewer等)を起動する反復レビュー・ループが共有する起動契約と手順の正本。Agentツールでの同期起動、2ラウンド目以降の同一エージェント継続、レビュー指示文の追加要件、失敗の扱い、1ラウンドを回して結末を出すまでの流れを定義する。内部専用でユーザーが直接使うものではない。

Address GitHub PR review feedback at line, file, and PR level — fetch, evaluate, fix, commit, and resolve. Use when given a PR URL, a review-comment URL, or a PR-level comment URL. Triggers: GitHub discussion URLs, "fix this review comment", "address PR feedback", "resolve PR comments", PR URLs with #discussion_, #issuecomment-, or #pullrequestreview- fragments.

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-fix pipeline for Codex. Equivalent to the repository's Claude skill: collect review feedback, apply fixes through the existing review workflow, and prepare replies. Usage: /review [<issue#>|<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 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/spec 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。

Review code changes adversarially using parallel review layers (Blind Hunter, Edge Case Hunter, Acceptance Auditor) with structured triage into actionable categories. Use when the user says "run code review" or "review this 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。

Read-only reviewer for agent-flow. Judges one diff against the acceptance criteria, AGENTS.md rules, protected paths and risk boundaries; returns a JSON verdict with line-anchored findings. Use when launched with AGENT_FLOW_ROLE=reviewer or asked for an agent-flow review of a diff.

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。

Iteratively improves a PR (GitHub), MR (GitLab), or shelved changelist (Perforce) until it reaches the repository's configured Greptile merge threshold with zero unresolved actionable comments, or until the five-review maximum is reached. Triggers Greptile review, fixes all actionable comments, pushes/re-shelves, re-triggers review only for new head SHAs unless a 5/5 score is already published, and repeats. Use when the user wants to optimize a PR/MR/CL against Greptile's code review standards without creating runaway review loops.

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。

[Planning] Use when you need to auto-review a plan for validity, correctness, and best practices — recursive: review, validate findings with why-review, fix validated findings, full re-review until no findings.

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。

WeChat Mini Program development skill for building, debugging, previewing, testing, publishing, and optimizing mini program projects. This skill should be used when users ask to create, develop, modify, debug, preview, test, deploy, publish, launch, review, or optimize WeChat Mini Programs, mini program pages, components, `tabBar`, routing, navigation, icon assets, project structure, project configuration, `project.config.json`, `appid` setup, device preview, real-device validation, WeChat Developer Tools Nightly workflows, `wechatide` CLI, WeChat IDE Skills/MCP, console/network debugging, `miniprogram-ci` preview/upload flows, or mini program release processes. It should also be used when users explicitly mention CloudBase, `wx.cloud`, Tencent CloudBase, 腾讯云开发, 微信云开发, or 云开发 in a mini program project.

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/spec 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。

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。

Comprehensive code review for quality, security, performance. Triggers on 'review code', 'code review', 'check this PR', 'audit 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。

Review+fix protocol with optional pre-core git diff review and safety guardrails (unsoundness, invariants, footguns, incidental complexity). Use when prompts say "/tw-fix this PR", "fix current branch", "fix this diff", "repair CI red", or "apply a minimal patch", and when crash/corruption/invariant-break issues need correction with a validation signal. Stop only after self-review exhausts actionable changes, each full cycle reaches post-self-review rerun plus terminal diff-review closure, and two consecutive zero-edit full cycles are clean.

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。

Summarises one sprint from the board export, sprint report and review or stand-up notes the user provides into a one-page DRAFT sprint review summary: the sprint goal as written, items delivered, items not delivered with the reasons the sources state, carry-over, impediments, metrics exactly as given, and numbered questions for the retrospective, every row referenced to a work item or note fragment and every missing fact marked UNKNOWN. Use when the user asks to "summarise the sprint", "write the sprint review", "what did we deliver this sprint", "list the carry-over and blockers" or "draft the sprint recap". Do not use for the retrospective write-up or themed lessons across several sprints, use lessons-learned-synthesis instead; for a weekly project status report, use project-status-tracker. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs 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。

Reviews a RAID log (risks, assumptions, issues, dependencies) line by line and returns a DRAFT review pack: which entries are stale, overdue, duplicated, ownerless, incomplete or misfiled, why, and a proposed update per line as current text against proposed text with the decision the project manager must take. Never re-rates, closes, merges or edits the log. Use when the user asks to "review the RAID log", "clean up the risk log", "health-check the RAID log before the steering meeting", "which risks are stale", "find duplicate risks" or "refresh the issue log". Do not use for setting up a new RAID log or logging a single new risk, issue or decision, use project-status-tracker instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs 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。

Reads one export transaction, order or shipment description and returns a DRAFT export review pack: parties to screen with a screening checklist, an item classification worksheet, a red-flag review, licence-determination questions and open items. Use when the user asks to "prepare the export review for this order", "pre-check this shipment for export control", "who do we need to screen on this deal", "build the classification worksheet for this item" or "assemble the trade-compliance file for this technology transfer". Do not use for vendor security or due-diligence screening of a supplier's questionnaire answers; use vendor-risk-screening-brief instead. Never classifies, screens, clears, decides licence need or releases a shipment; trade compliance does. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs 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。

Turns sustainability or ESG reports the user provides into a DRAFT question pack for reviewers: every quantitative disclosure as stated with unit, period, boundary and page, year-over-year changes computed only from the stated figures with the arithmetic shown, targets with stated and computed progress, restatements and inconsistencies, gaps and specific questions to the report owner. No assurance, accuracy or conformance verdict. Use when the user asks to "prepare review questions on our sustainability report", "what changed year on year in this ESG report", "check the figures in this report before it goes to the board", "find the gaps in this ESG disclosure" or "build a question pack for the report owner". Do not use for reviewing marketing text against environmental-claim rules, use green-claims-review instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs 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。