「rev」の検索結果

Run an adversarial two-phase code review of a change with TWO independent reviewers — Claude and Codex — who review alone, then cross-examine each other's findings, then Claude synthesizes a single weighted verdict. Use when the user says "/adversarial-review", "adversarial review", "review this with Codex", "get Codex to review", "two-reviewer review", "cross-examine this PR", or wants a second independent model to grade a change before merge.

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 PRs/diffs/branches/documents for .NET quality, correctness, performance, security, data access, messaging, and observability. Includes adversarial critical-thinking mode for skeptical/cynical review requests. Keywords: code review, review PR, review diff, critical review, cynical review, adversarial review, production readiness, low GC, AOT, security 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。

GitHub pull request review desk (Busabase App-in-Skill) using the gh CLI for real GitHub access, an AirApp review UI for human approval, and a trusted gh pr review execution step. Use when the user invokes /kelly-pr-review or $kelly-pr-review, asks to review GitHub PRs, generate a PR review batch, approve/comment/request changes through the review UI, or execute approved GitHub 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。

Self-review, audit, or verify CS/AI/ML paper drafts as a critical peer reviewer. Three-round review (evidence→argument→style) with Verification Status and debt tracking. Use when: reviewing a paper draft before submission, checking evidence compliance of claims, simulating peer reviewer feedback, verifying citation closure and evidence debts, performing cross-section consistency checks. Triggers on: 审修, self review, 自查, verification, revise, 修订, check draft, 审稿, evidence compliance, peer review, 论文审查, draft audit, 验证论文, 检查引用, cross-section 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。

研究文書（概要/梗概/アブストラクト・研究論文・卒業論文）を種別自動判別し、研究の骨子・グローバル一貫性・当てどころ・関連研究・説明不足・弱点・体裁の各面から一括レビューして教員向け統合1ファイルに集約するメタスキル。framing-check(骨子＋一貫性)・aim-check(当てどころ)・articulation-check(5W)・weakness-analyze(弱点)・lit-survey(関連研究)で検出し、shepherd で内容面を整形、format-check(概要は --fixed で紙面配分)で体裁を見る。--student で student-comment に渡し学生向け1枚も生成。論文・概要・卒論・中間発表予稿を「レビューして」「総合的に見て」と言われたときに使う。旧 abstract-review / paper-review / thesis-review / review を統合。

差分が「その差分自身を審査するレビュー基準・品質ゲート」を弱めていないかを diff-time で検出する。Check 1 レビュールールの削除・弱体化（.river/rules.md / .river/rules.d/*）、Check 2 実行時コンフィグの閾値・ゲート緩和（.river-review.{json,yaml,yml} の review.severity 引き下げ / exclude 拡大 / memory.suppressionEnabled 無効化 / selection.skills.exclude 追加）、Check 3 suppression entry の新規追加、Check 4 lint・静的解析設定からのルール削除や無効化、Check 5 branch protection・required check の緩和、の 5 Check を対象とし、これらが機能変更と同一 PR に混在し、かつ意図の宣言が無い場合に指摘する。report-only。workflow の permissions / action pin は gha-workflow-security、既存 suppression entry の使い分けは suppression-feedback、設定ファイルの一般的妥当性は config-json、.only / .skip / @ts-ignore / @ts-nocheck は heuristic-review.mjs の決定論検出器、リファクタと機能追加の混在は behavior-structure-separation へ委譲する

6つの専門レビュアーロールを並列実行し、consensusLevel（複数ロールの合意度）と Tech Lead レポート（top3指摘・blindSpots・consensusSummary）で結果を統合する マルチエージェントレビュー entry skill。 Parallel multi-role review with consensus scoring (consensusLevel) and Tech Lead report. Use when a major release needs exhaustive multi-angle review, or when a single-perspective review is not enough and you want confidence that no reviewer angle was missed（重要リリース前の網羅レビュー・多視点の確証が 欲しいとき）。

Uncorrelated Evaluator — 4軸ルーブリック専門エージェント（functionality-reviewer・code-reviewer・design-reviewer・originality-reviewer）と security-reviewer を5並列実行し、成果物を多面的に独立評価します。PASS / NEEDS WORK / BLOCKED 判定を返します。Self-leniency 防止のため、実装エージェントのコンテキストを引き継がない新規エージェントとして起動します。「レビューして」「評価して」「実装を確認して」などのリクエストで起動します。

Interactive developer experience plan review. Explores developer personas, benchmarks against competitors, designs magical moments, and traces friction points before scoring. Three modes: DX EXPANSION (competitive advantage), DX POLISH (bulletproof every touchpoint), DX TRIAGE (critical gaps only). Use when asked to "DX review", "developer experience audit", "devex review", or "API design review". Proactively suggest when the user has a plan for developer-facing products (APIs, CLIs, SDKs, libraries, platforms, docs). (gstack) Voice triggers (speech-to-text aliases): "dx review", "developer experience review", "devex review", "devex audit", "API design review", "onboarding 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。

Converts a markdown PR writeup or code review (one with ```diff fenced blocks and severity-tagged > [!BLOCKER]/[!MAJOR]/[!MINOR]/[!NIT] callouts) into a single-file 2-column HTML review — unified-diff on the left, severity-tagged annotation cards on the right, top jump-nav listing every finding, mandatory named reviewer footer. Triggers when the markdown-html-orchestrator classifies an input as REVIEW, or when invoked directly via /cs:md-review. Refuses without explicit --reviewer (a code review must name a human), refuses if no diff hunks present (route to md-document instead), and refuses to encode severity in color only (every badge ships color + icon + aria-label per WCAG 1.4.1). Use after orchestrator routing.

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。

Evidence-first pull request judge that reviews a PR and posts one consolidated GitHub review with inline comments via the gh CLI. Runs the repo's own deterministic checks first, researches current official docs before any claim about external libraries or APIs, then reviews correctness, security, structural quality (code judo, spaghetti growth, file-size limits), and AI slop including useless code comments. Every finding must carry evidence, every comment passes a deterministic noise gate before posting, and the verdict (APPROVE, COMMENT, REQUEST_CHANGES) is weighed by findings. Use when asked to review a PR, judge this PR, review this branch or diff before merge, run the-judge, "revise esse PR", "faca o code review", or "julgue esse PR". Do NOT use for reviewing prose or documents, fixing CI failures, resolving merge conflicts, writing the fix itself, or responding to review comments (use gh-address-comments).

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, audit, or revise point-by-point reviewer response letters for Nature-family manuscript revisions. Use when the user provides reviewer comments, editor decision letters, revision notes, response drafts, or asks how to respond to major/minor revision requests, rebuttal letters, response to reviewers, peer-review reports, 审稿意见回复, 逐点回复, 修回信, 大修回复, 小修回复, or 如何回复 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。

Deep-review-first audit for Chinese and English academic papers across LaTeX, Typst, and PDF formats. Use whenever the user wants reviewer-style paper critique, pre-submission readiness checks, pass/fail gate decisions, structured revision roadmaps, or re-audits of revised manuscripts. Trigger even if the user only says "review my paper", "check if this is ready to submit", "audit this PDF", "simulate peer review", "find the biggest problems in this manuscript", or "re-check whether I fixed the review issues". Do not use for direct source editing or compilation-heavy repair; route those to the format-specific writing skills instead.

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。

[omh] Agent or automation safety risks: review prompt, tool, secret, dependency, destructive-action, and explicit local plugin risks before agent or code execution. Use when the user says: security-safety-review, security safety review, ai coding safety, agent safety review, prompt injection review, tool permission review, secret exposure review, destructive action 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 explaining or planning around AISTATS peer review, OpenReview review release, author-reviewer discussion, reviewer volunteer expectations, reviewer confidentiality, decision criteria, meta-review dynamics, the statistician-heavy reviewer pool, and PMLR proceedings 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。

Approval cascade definition and tracking for multi-stakeholder document workflows. Internal review sequences, client approval workflows, regulatory review, overdue chasing with escalation logic, version control coordination, and cross-jurisdiction document dependencies. Use when defining who reviews a document and in what order, tracking where a document is stuck in the approval chain, chasing an overdue reviewer, preventing reviewers working on superseded drafts, or mapping dependencies between documents across jurisdictions. Trigger on: 'who needs to approve this', 'document approval', 'review sequence', 'stuck in review', 'overdue approval', 'who has the document', 'version control', 'wrong version', 'document dependency', 'NL SPA waiting on German opinion', 'approval cascade', 'review chain', 'document circulation', 'chasing the partner', 'client approval process', 'where is the document'.

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。

Systematic academic paper review workflow covering self-review before submission and rebuttal writing after receiving reviewer feedback. Triggers on "review paper", "self-review", "write rebuttal", "respond to reviewers", "analyze review comments", "paper 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。

The art of reviewing code that improves both the codebase and the developer - sharing knowledge, maintaining standards, and building cultureUse when "code review, PR review, pull request, merge request, review comments, LGTM, review feedback, approve PR, request changes, review checklist, code quality, review standards, code-review, pull-request, PR, quality, standards, feedback, collaboration, mentoring" mentioned.

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。

Independent review loop run before delivery in code work. An independent reviewer (Codex, or fresh Codex-style subagents) reads the whole PR against the approved outcome; the lead fixes in-scope functional findings and re-reviews until none remain. Its differentiator is independence and exhaustiveness — a reviewer that fails differently from the authors, run to clean — distinct from the recursive-refinement ladder. Invoked by the team lead from the unified pre-ship gate (code-mode and /swarm:refine) after the ship steps.

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。

Adversarial, security-first review of a pull request from an EXTERNAL or untrusted contributor — a fork PR, a first-time or unknown author, anyone without write access — before a maintainer merges it. Use this whenever you're reviewing, triaging, or deciding whether to merge a PR opened against tbh-meter by someone outside the maintainer team: 'review PR #123', 'someone opened a PR — is it safe to merge?', 'check this contributor's changes', 'can we take this fork PR?', 'is this contribution legit?'. This is supply-chain DEFENSE, not ordinary code review: every merged PR auto-updates onto every user's machine and ships a memory-reading .exe plus an unsandboxed Electron app, so the author and the PR description are UNTRUSTED and the diff is the only evidence. It posts its verdict as a real GitHub review — an inline comment pinned to each problematic line (via the pulls/reviews API), not just one summary comment. NOT for your own or a fellow maintainer's branch (use self-review for that), and prefer this over the generic review flow for anything coming from outside the 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。

App Store プレビュー動画を Remotion (React) で生成する Agent Team スキル。 video-director が構成を設計し、script-writer がナレーション台本を作成し、 motion-designer が Remotion コードを実装し、preview-reviewer がコードレビューし、 frame-inspector がレンダリング結果を目視検証する。 Use when: App Store プレビュー動画を作りたい、アプリのプロモーション動画を作りたい、 Remotion で動画を生成したい。 Triggers: "プレビュー動画", "App Store 動画", "アプリ動画", "preview movie", "Remotion", "動画作成", "app preview"

Review a pull request end-to-end using GitHub CLI. Covers diff analysis, commit history review, CI/CD check verification, severity-leveled feedback (blocking/suggestion/nit/praise), and gh pr review submission. Use when a pull request is assigned for review, performing a self-review before requesting others' input, conducting a second review after feedback is addressed, or auditing a merged PR for post-merge quality assessment.

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。

Iterative manuscript improvement workflow where a reviewer agent critiques, an author agent revises, a verifier checks the revision, and the loop repeats until acceptance or a human-pause condition is reached. Use for virtual peer review, reviewer-author revision loops, rebuttal preparation, resubmission polishing, journal paper improvement, response-to-reviewers drafting, and deciding when additional data, experiments, theory, modeling, or author judgment is required before further revision.

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 marketing KPIs and produce an executive summary with insights, anomalies, and recommended actions using the Storytelling with Data framework (Cole Nussbaumer Knaflic). Every review starts with a Big Idea - one sentence capturing the insight, its implication, and why it matters. Use when the user asks for a KPI review, monthly metrics review, marketing dashboard review, "review last month's numbers", quarterly review, performance review, or wants to analyze marketing data. Reads kpis.md and any uploaded data files. For planning a campaign against these numbers, see campaign-brief. For the post-campaign learning loop, see retro. For setting the baseline itself, see brand-context.

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。