「critique」の検索結果

Direct, build and render premium cinematic motion design from code — launch films, product and feature videos, looping feature animations for landing pages and social, logo stings and reveals, UI walkthroughs, app demos, kinetic type, teasers, trailers, intros and promo clips. Use this whenever the user wants any video, animation, motion graphic or animated demo made with Remotion, HyperFrames, HTML/GSAP or React, or asks to storyboard, time, score, render, polish or critique one — even if they only say "make a video about X", "animate this feature" or "we need a launch clip". It supplies concept and copy discipline, type and colour taste that defers to a supplied brand, a beat-locked timeline that drives both picture and a synthesized soundtrack, choreography and transition craft, real product UI in motion, film-grade finishing (true motion blur, no banding, BT.709, sync-checked mux) and a measured self-critique loop on contact sheets and renders.

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。

Critique a screen's composition — balance, whitespace, rhythm, and gestalt principles.

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。

Critique a screen's colour usage — contrast ratios, palette coherence, semantic meaning, and colour accessibility.

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。

Critique a screen's typography — scale usage, readability, consistency, and token compliance.

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。

Critique a screen's brand consistency against mood.md, voice.md, and tokens.md.

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。

Critique a screen's visual hierarchy — entry point, eye flow, weight distribution, and emphasis.

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。

Facilitate structured design critiques with clear feedback frameworks and actionable outcomes.

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。

Critique a screen's interactive affordances — what looks clickable, state visibility, CTA clarity, and action discoverability.

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。

Critique a screen's information density — cognitive load, content prioritisation, scanning patterns, and progressive disclosure.

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。

Push the LLM to reconsider, refine, and improve its recent output. Use when user asks for deeper critique or mentions a known deeper critique method, e.g. socratic, first principles, pre-mortem, red team

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。

Push the LLM to reconsider, refine, and improve its recent output. Use when user asks for deeper critique or mentions a known deeper critique method, e.g. socratic, first principles, pre-mortem, red team.

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。

Spec or critique custom illustrations — style, composition, and brand alignment. Use when asked to "spec an illustration", "critique this illustration", or "define an illustration style".

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 creative process in art from idea to exhibition. Covers five phases of creative work (inspiration, incubation, exploration, execution, reflection), sketchbook practice, artist statements, critique methodology (formal and conceptual), portfolio development, and the studio as a working environment. Use when guiding students through project development, facilitating critique sessions, developing artist statements, curating portfolios, or understanding how professional artists structure their creative practice.

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 before any CLI/TUI display code is written, modified, or audited — runs the 7-stage discipline (Context, Register, Shape brief, Implement, Critique, Audit, Polish) for Typer, Rich, Textual, and Questionary work, grounded in per-project PRODUCT.md and DESIGN.TUI.md/DESIGN.md. Triggers on output formatting, display design, interactive prompts, visual consistency, TUI layout, progress display, dashboard design, design audit, design polish, design critique, shape brief, register decision (brand-cli vs product-cli), and AI-slop 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。

Skeptical analysis and critique of claims, plans, and code without taking anyone at face value. Use when the user says "don't trust me", wants adversarial review, red-teaming, assumption checking, or verification that generated or proposed code is actually correct. Triggers on skepticism, critique everything, verify claims, challenge assumptions, red team, devil's advocate, prove it, smell test.

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。

Push the LLM to reconsider, refine, and improve its recent output. Use when user asks for deeper critique or mentions a known deeper critique method, e.g. socratic, first principles, pre-mortem, red team

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。

Evaluate design from a UX perspective with Nielsen's heuristics scoring, anti-pattern detection, persona-based testing, and actionable feedback. Report-only. Triggers on critique, UX review, design feedback, how does this look, evaluate the design, component 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。

Use when independent proposals on a contested decision need cross-critique before choosing, reusing the original authors. Not for parallel multi-stance investigation: use council.

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 a strict multi-iteration Reflex Loop with phases (PLAN, PRODUCE||PREPARE, EVALUATE, CRITIQUE, REFINE) to improve an artifact until quality gates pass or iteration limits are reached. Use when user asks for iterative refinement, quality-gated generation, or "generate -> critique -> refine" 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。

Run a strict multi-iteration Reflex Loop with phases (PLAN, PRODUCE||PREPARE, EVALUATE, CRITIQUE, REFINE) to improve an artifact until quality gates pass or iteration limits are reached. Use when user asks for iterative refinement, quality-gated generation, or "generate -> critique -> refine" 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。

Run a Duck Critic producer-critic loop: you (main) keep producing the plan/code/tests and gate your own work at checkpoints with a different-model critic, revising until it passes. Use when asked for rubber duck, ラバーダック, 別モデルレビュー, second opinion, critic, or a different-model code review, design review, plan critique, or review by another model/agent harness. Not for readability refactoring or code cleanup alone.

UI design and implementation for real product surfaces with taste-first critique, reference routing, project-specific design briefs, variation comparison, and implementation verification. Use when Codex should redesign, build, polish, or critique frontend UI by reading project context, exploring taste, routing through `references/catalog.md`, synthesizing `PROJECT_DESIGN.md` or `design.md`, using investment gates to avoid wrong taste/reference/scope, implementing in the existing stack, and evaluating whether the result is actually better. Best for app screens, dashboards, landing pages, query tools, product surfaces, and design explorations; not for backend-only work or tiny cosmetic 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。