1.5万 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
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。
When the user wants help with revenue operations, lead lifecycle management, or marketing-to-sales handoff processes. Also use when the user mentions 'RevOps,' 'revenue operations,' 'lead scoring,' 'lead routing,' 'MQL,' 'SQL,' 'pipeline stages,' 'deal desk,' 'CRM automation,' 'marketing-to-sales handoff,' 'data hygiene,' 'leads aren't getting to sales,' 'pipeline management,' 'lead qualification,' or 'when should marketing hand off to sales.' Use this for anything involving the systems and processes that connect marketing to revenue. For cold outreach emails, see cold-email. For email drip campaigns, see emails. For pricing decisions, see pricing.
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, Kotlin, C#, .NET, Java, C, C++, Rust, Ruby, PHP, and Dart/Flutter. Analyzes PRs for complexity and risk, checks code quality for SOLID violations and code smells, generates review reports. Use when reviewing pull requests, analyzing code quality, identifying issues, 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。
Use when the user asks to fix open failing reviews, invokes $roborev-fix, or provides job IDs; do not use when the user only pastes review findings with no request to discover or close 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。
Use when the user asks to fix open failing reviews, invokes /roborev-fix, or provides job IDs; do not use when the user only pastes review findings with no request to discover or close 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。
The Trade Reviewer's procedure for journaling desk activity and reviewing trades from the exchange record - process graded separately from outcome, execution costs measured, one repeatable finding per review, plus the weekly desk review. Use after any send, when a trade closes, on the weekly routine, or when the user asks "how did that go".
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。
Prepares a focused code review request for a branch, commit, pull request, or substantial working-tree diff by defining the review boundary, contract, risk areas, evidence, and questions for an independent reviewer. Use before merge or when another agent needs to review an implementation. Not for processing feedback already received or for claiming runtime correctness.
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 the user wants help with revenue operations, lead lifecycle management, or marketing-to-sales handoff processes. Also use when the user mentions 'RevOps,' 'revenue operations,' 'lead scoring,' 'lead routing,' 'MQL,' 'SQL,' 'pipeline stages,' 'deal desk,' 'CRM automation,' 'marketing-to-sales handoff,' 'data hygiene,' 'leads aren't getting to sales,' 'pipeline management,' 'lead qualification,' or 'when should marketing hand off to sales.' Use this for anything involving the systems and processes that connect marketing to revenue. For cold outreach emails, see cold-email. For email drip campaigns, see emails. For pricing decisions, see pricing.
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 with several independent reviewers in parallel, then triage and present the findings. 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。
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。
Use when receiving external input that needs structured intake before action — PR review feedback, code review comments, OR issue tracker items (bug reports, feature requests). PR Review Mode (default) verifies suggestions before implementing. Issue Triage Mode classifies issues into a state machine (ready-for-agent / ready-for-human / needs-info / wontfix) and emits AGENT-BRIEFs for AFK execution. Prevents blind implementation, enforces verification-first discipline.
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 looking up journal or magazine name abbreviations, converting between full names and ISO 4/MEDLINE abbreviations, processing BibTeX files for journal name standardization, or answering questions about 期刊缩写/杂志缩写. Triggers on "journal abbreviation", "abbreviate journal", "journal name", "期刊缩写", "杂志缩写", "ISO 4", "LTWA", "BibTeX journal". PROACTIVELY USE when user mentions citation formatting, reference list preparation, or manuscript submission to specific journals.
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 Go backend code review with optional parallel review areas. Use when reviewing changed Go files; detects BubbleTea, Wish SSH, and Prometheus and loads the matching review skills.
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。
Codify project review rules as deterministic guards — ast-grep structural rules (with TDD-style rule tests) for mechanical checks, REVIEW_GUIDELINES.md for qualitative ones, wired into the project gate / wf verify. Use when the user wants to define review rules, turn a repeated review finding into a lint/guard, or set up ast-grep in a 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。
Audits Solidity liquidation mechanisms for denial of service vulnerabilities including unbounded loops over positions causing out-of-gas reverts, data structure corruption preventing liquidation, front-running to block liquidation via nonce changes or self-liquidation, pending withdrawals forcing reverts, malicious ERC721/ERC20 callback reverts, collateral in external vaults not seized, insufficient insurance fund blocking liquidation, fixed bonus exceeding available collateral, incorrect decimal handling, conflicting nonReentrant modifiers, zero value transfer reverts, token deny list issues, and single borrower edge cases
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-cutting review of recent work — catches gaps between specialists. Use when asked to "review what we built", "check the work", "pre-launch review", or after completing a significant chunk of 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。
Perform a thorough, Incan-project-aware code review. Use when the user asks for a review, code critique, PR review, or says /review. Checks Rust anti-patterns, compiler pipeline completeness, error handling, test coverage, style conventions, and RFC compliance specific to the Incan compiler codebase.
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。
Interacts with live Hunk diff review sessions via CLI. Inspects review focus, navigates files, hunks, and exact lines, reloads session contents, adds inline review comments, and paints attention marks on character ranges. Use when the user has a Hunk session running or wants to review diffs interactively.
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。
Structured review process for Remotion video implementations. Analyzes spec compliance, detects common timing/easing issues, validates asset quality, and provides prioritized revision lists. Use when reviewing Remotion code against design specs or performing quality assurance on video compositions. Trigger phrases "review video code", "check spec compliance", "audit Remotion implementation".
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 says 'send this to my client', 'get feedback on this page', 'send a review link', 'what did the client say', or 'work through the review notes'. Sends a Murmur review link, reads the notes reviewers pin to the page, replies, applies each change on a duplicate, and resolves every note with the snapshot of the change.
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 code-reviewer agent for two-stage review. Use after completing implementation tasks.
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。
Step 5 of the PaperOrchestra pipeline (arXiv:2604.05018). Iteratively refine drafts/paper.tex by simulating peer review and applying targeted revisions, with strict accept/revert halt rules. Maintains a worklog and snapshots each iteration so revert is real, not symbolic. TRIGGER when the orchestrator delegates Step 5 or when the user asks to "refine the draft", "iterate on the paper", or "run peer review on this paper".
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。
5つの専門エージェント（UXデザイナー・ビジュアルデザイナー・アクセシビリティ専門家・ モバイルUI専門家・コピーデザイナー）がチームでUIを添削・改善するスキル。 Pencil(.pen)で画面デザインを作成・修正しながら、リアルタイムで議論する。 新規画面デザインの作成と既存UIのレビュー・改善の両方に対応。 iOS / Web / 汎用プラットフォームに対応。 Use when: UIを添削したい、画面デザインをレビューしたい、UIを改善したい、 デザインの品質を上げたい、UIのフィードバックがほしい、画面を作りたい。 Triggers: "UIレビュー", "UI添削", "デザインレビュー", "画面レビュー", "UIを見て", "デザインチェック", "UI改善", "画面デザイン", "ui review", "design review", "UI作成", "画面作成", "UIフィードバック"
Review a data analysis for quality, correctness, and reproducibility. Covers data quality assessment, assumption checking, model validation, data leakage detection, and reproducibility verification. Use when reviewing a colleague's analysis before publication, validating an ML pipeline before production deployment, auditing a report for regulatory or business decision-making, or performing a second-analyst review in a regulated environment.
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。