「reviewer」の検索結果

Senior engineer conducting thorough, constructive code reviews. Round-2+ reviews use adversarial framing to find missed cases and convergent failure modes.

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 adversarial code review. Spawns three reviewer subagents (Auditor, Adversary, Pragmatist) on a single model, runs a cross-examination round, then deterministically synthesizes a single ranked report. Use this for non-trivial PRs, security-sensitive changes, refactors that touch many files, or any change where one perspective has obvious blind spots. Trigger phrases include "adverse review", "adversarial review", "multi-perspective review", "review my changes from multiple angles", "panel review". NOT suitable for trivial diffs (typos, dependency bumps, formatting).

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 holistic, human-reviewer-style critique of the currently staged Git changes (or, with `--working-copy`, of all uncommitted changes, with `--branch`, of a branch against its base, or, with `--commit`, of a single commit) and emit an approve/reject verdict with prioritized, severity-tagged, line-cited findings. Use when the user wants the staged diff, a branch, or a commit "reviewed", "critiqued", or "code-reviewed".

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。

Builds, revises, restyles, and critiques deliberate, editable Feishu / Lark whiteboards from content, references, existing SVGs, or live boards. Use for whiteboards, infographics, diagrams, system maps, timelines, decision boards, posters, and visual explainers that need factual fidelity, strong hierarchy, intentional composition, and evidence-based review rather than a generic grid of equal cards. Routes creation, revision, and critique through separate playbooks; commits to a content-and-design contract before drawing; validates deterministic SVG defects; renders and inspects the actual artifact; and uses an independent final reviewer for material deliveries.

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 reviewing, debugging, or improving frontend code in this repo (website/ HTML, CSS, JS, service workers, PWA assets) or when asked to "review frontend", "revisa el html/css", "review JS", or "audita el frontend". Reviews for correctness, browser compatibility, accessibility, performance, security (XSS), responsive behavior, and PWA/service-worker correctness, and ends with a "what a user/reviewer would catch" pass.

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 reviewing, debugging, or giving feedback on Go code in this repo (exercises/part2, website/tools, or any *.go file) or when asked for a "code review", "review this Go", "revisa este código Go", or "crítica de código". Reviews for correctness, idiomatic Go, error handling, resource cleanup, concurrency, performance, and security, and always ends with a test-thinking pass (what a test would catch). For exercises/part2, prefer the go-exercise-reviewer skill which knows the module-mode quirk; this skill covers general Go anywhere in the 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。

Use when proofreading, copy-editing, or verifying English in any docs/**/*.mdx chapter or code comment in this repo. Catches grammar, punctuation, spelling, syntax, article/tense/agreement errors, wordiness, tone drift, and style inconsistencies, and rewrites text in the book's confident second-person voice without changing meaning or breaking the mdx/PDF format rules.

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 reviewing, writing, or debugging Go code under exercises/part2/ (and matching embedded code in docs/part2/**/*.mdx). Thinks hard about correctness, idiomatic Go, error handling, resource cleanup, concurrency, and — crucially — what the tests would catch: edge cases, races, leaks, timeouts, and port conflicts. Knows the repo's module-mode quirk (GO111MODULE=off) and which dirs carry go.mod.

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 you want a strict review of a marketing asset against style rules, factual accuracy, and messaging alignment.

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 changes in samples/book-app-web for accessibility, responsive layout, tests/build validation, and small beginner-safe 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。

INVOKE THIS SKILL before creating any PR to ensure compliance with branch naming, changelog requirements, and reviewer assignment.

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。

MUST be invoked before creating any PR, pushing a branch for review, or running `gh pr create`. Covers changelog entries, branch naming, PHPCS/PHPUnit checks, and reviewer assignment.

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。

Assess an immutable patch artifact's program impact, regression risk, and auto-merge eligibility. Use for generated patch files, provider pull-request diffs, or commit ranges when reviewers need evidence about affected runtime paths, contracts, tests, and recoverability. This skill is read-only and does not generate, edit, apply, push, or merge the patch.

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。

用于审查已完成的工作、重大功能或合并前的变更，核对需求并按严重程度识别风险。未经审查不得合并。

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。

Use for code/PR/diff review and refactor audits. Triggers: review this, before merge, antipattern, 리뷰, 코드 리뷰, 머지 전에 확인.

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 code implementations for correctness, security, maintainability with confidence-scored findings (converted from agent)

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。

Force adversarial code review stance that eliminates confirmation bias — reviewer must find issues or re-analyze

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。

Map user journeys, onboarding paths, entry points, first actions, trust points, accessibility risks, and SEO/LLM handoffs for public websites without redesigning the visual system. Use this skill when the user asks how new readers, returning users, project reviewers, community members, buyers, or AI agents should move through a site and what each page must make clear before layout 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。

Run an independent read-only Kimi review over the current working tree or a branch diff. Use when the user wants a second reviewer for defects, regressions, or implementation risks, not edits.

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。

Apply WIT (Writing Is Thinking) as a human–LLM collaborative scientific reasoning skill for scientific question formulation, finding-driven research planning, next-experiment selection, Results or Discussion review, claim–evidence and reviewer stress tests, manuscript logic audits, deadline closure, and researcher growth. Use when the user invokes WIT or asks for these question-driven scientific reasoning workflows; do not use for generic copyediting, summarization, or literature search alone.

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 recent high-relevance papers from a target venue to identify claim-relevant experimental evidence gaps after core P0 results exist. Use for venue completeness and reviewer-risk analysis; not for redefining the research question or running experiments.

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。