「viewer」の検索結果

Use when a diff needs four parallel perspective reviewers (Security, Performance, Quality, Accessibility). Creates an ephemeral SAM plan, collects structured verdicts, synthesizes them into one deduplicated cross-referenced punch list, prints one summary line per perspective, and exits non-zero if any perspective returns REJECT. SKIP is a passing outcome.

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 existing tests against the software and contracts they actually exercise. Use to assess whether a test has justified unique protection, detects consequential faults, tolerates valid refactors, earns its lifecycle cost, or deserves strengthening, replacement, consolidation, or removal consideration. Reviews are read-only and evidence-backed, including TDD and regression tests.

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 browser-rendered HTML, CSS, JSX, TSX, JavaScript, and TypeScript for accessibility, XSS, forms, focus, rendering performance, styles, and lifecycle cleanup. Loaded by dh:code-reviewer when source or framework entrypoints establish frontend execution; composes with TypeScript checks.

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 skill, agent, and plugin artifacts against their intended consumer's schema and runtime contract. Loaded by dh:code-reviewer for SKILL.md, agent definitions, or plugin manifests; checks discovery, frontmatter, triggers, tools, context cost, bundled references, and caller handoffs.

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 Python boundaries, typing, error handling, tests, dependencies, and supported-version idioms against the target project's contracts and active tools. Loaded by dh:code-reviewer for Python source; uses Python-engineering standards when available and retains standalone checks otherwise.

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 SAM Stage 5 Execution has completed and task results need independent verification against acceptance criteria. Dispatches a separate reviewer agent to fact-check implementation outputs and returns COMPLETE or NEEDS_WORK with specific findings and remediation 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。

Provides TypeScript-specific code review patterns covering strict mode, ESM, type safety, branded types, discriminated unions, async patterns, runtime safety, and common anti-patterns. Activates on detection of tsconfig.json, *.ts, or *.tsx files during code review — loaded automatically by dh:code-reviewer.

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。

Analyze git repository history to produce a codebase risk profile before code review. Probes repo size, runs 7 parallel git analysis pipelines (hotspots, bug magnets, bus factor, contributor momentum, firefighting frequency, newly added files), cross-references hotspots with bug magnets to identify high-risk files with primary owner annotation, and writes walkthrough/recon-report.md. Use before code review to prioritize reviewer attention, at the start of linear-walkthrough Phase 1 Discovery to weight file coverage, or when onboarding to an unfamiliar 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。

Interviews a researcher in rounds until an idea, design, or draft has no unexamined decision — numbered questions, each with why it matters and a recommended answer, facts looked up rather than asked, and settled decisions written to a file. Stages are idea (topic or hunch to a falsifiable question and contribution claim), design (estimand, identification, sample and power, measurement, analysis plan, pre-registration, venue), and defend (reviewer objections to a finished design or draft). Use when the user says "grill me", asks to stress-test or poke holes in an idea, design, or plan, asks what they are assuming, or brings an idea that is not yet a design. --plan grills software or process plans.

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。

Drafts a referee report for a journal editor. Produces a recommendation, claim-and-design summary, three to six decision-driving concerns, additional concerns, and a revision plan through five parallel adversarial finders, Breaker, Butcher, Shredder, Void, Situator, a Blue Team error filter, Chief Reviewer synthesis, Tone Guard legal pass, and optional confidential editor note. Use when the user has been asked to referee a manuscript. Self-audits go to paper-review-lite or presubmit, and author responses go to referee-response.

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。

Organizes an author’s response to peer review. Extracts every referee and editor point, tags severity and type, orders the revision by dependency, flags defensible pushbacks as questions, and builds a numbered comment → response → location letter whose substantive answers the author writes. Use when the user has referee reports, a revise-and-resubmit decision, or an editor’s letter and wants to plan the revision, draft the response letter, or check that every point was addressed. The reviewer-side twin is journal-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。

Draft a referee report on someone else's manuscript for a journal editor, using five adversarial finders, a Blue Team error filter, a Chief Reviewer synthesis, and a Tone Guard legal pass. Use when the user has been asked to referee a manuscript; self-audits go to paper-review-lite or presubmit, author responses to referee-response.

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。

Consults Fable as an independent, read-only reviewer at an effort the caller matches to the question. The calling session (usually Opus, or Haiku) holds the task and escalates one decision point. Use before committing to an interpretation or a substantial piece of writing or analysis, when stuck or not converging, when changing approach, or as a final check on a finished task. Fallback for when the native advisor tool is unavailable. Not for a session already running Fable.

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 a validated ChatGPT/Codex Plugin needs accurate Plugin Directory fields, discovery metadata, starter prompts, and reviewer-facing listing details grounded in the packaged product.

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 an exact ChatGPT/Codex Plugin artifact has passed local package, brand, and listing gates and you need reviewer-ready submission evidence without confusing preparation, submission, approval, and publication states.

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 addressing PR review comments from Copilot, Claude, or human reviewers. Critically assesses each comment, recommends action (implement/push-back/discuss), and executes appropriately.

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。

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。

Maps the `hunkdiff/extension` authoring surface for Hunk, the terminal diff viewer — hiding or reordering reviewed files, docked panes, alternate file views, commands and key bindings, dialogs, workspace writes, themes, syntax languages, VCS backends, lifecycle events. Use when writing, debugging, or installing a Hunk extension, or when a request asks Hunk itself to behave differently. Not for reviewing a diff in a live session — that is hunk-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。

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。