「review loop」の検索結果

Restructure existing code without changing its behavior, through a test-gated refactoring loop: a named target, a green suite over that target before any edit, a planned sequence of small named refactorings, and the full suite re-run after every step. Use when the user wants to refactor, restructure, clean up, simplify, or improve the design of existing code, or to apply refactoring recommendations from a code-review or architectural-analysis report. This skill changes code; it does not review code (use code-review), assess architecture (use architectural-analysis), plan a multi-module restructure before executing it (use plan-a-change), map domain boundaries before restructuring along them (use ddd-analysis), or build new behavior test-first (use tdd). Do not use it on code inside an active tdd loop; the refactor step of tdd owns that cleanup. Runs its planned sequence to completion without pausing for review; to review each named refactoring as it lands, use pairing.

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 spec-driven agent loop where coding tasks live as markdown specs that move through inbox → active → archive, get implemented by Claude Code or Codex, and pass a review gate before they count as done. Use when the user mentions "loop factory", a "spec-driven loop", an "agent factory", wants repeatable/reviewable agent work, or when a repo has a factory/specs/inbox or factory/specs/active directory. Also covers installing and scaffolding the loop-factory CLI into 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。

Interactive escalation-resolution workflow for the bmad-loop orchestrator. A bmad-loop run paused on a CRITICAL escalation (a contradiction or gap a dev/review session could not safely resolve alone); you and the human disambiguate the frozen spec so the story can be re-driven. Invoked as /bmad-loop-resolve <story-key>. Unlike the automated dev/review sessions this session is interactive — a human is present and you SHOULD ask.

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 the Incan review/fix loop end to end: review, fix actionable findings, and review again until clean or blocked. Use when the user wants an autonomous review-and-repair pass or says /review-and-fix.

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 high-thoroughness end-to-end implementation loop using clean worker worktrees, per-slice planning, implementation, explicit review/fix iteration, orchestrator integration, and final commit/PR drafting. Use when the user explicitly wants a Ralph/Wiggum-style loop, autonomous multi-agent execution, a delegated feature/bugfix carried from confirmed scope through review-ready completion, or RFC-driven implementation that should be reviewed, bumped to In Progress, decomposed into phases, and executed through nested sub-loops. Supports Codex subagents by default and external CLI workers such as OpenCode when explicitly requested and available.

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。

Orchestrate a named multi-skill loop such as /loop /review /fix until clean or blocked. Use when the user explicitly asks to loop skills, rerun a review/fix cycle, or says /loop with one or more skill names.

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。

Select a `delaySeconds` value when scheduling a loop wakeup via the `ScheduleWakeup` tool or the `/loop` slash command. Covers the three-tier cache-aware decision (cache-warm under 5 minutes, cache-miss 5 minutes to 1 hour, idle default 20 to 30 minutes), the 300-second anti-pattern, the [60, 3600] runtime clamp, the minute-boundary rounding quirk, and writing a telemetry-worthy `reason` field. Use when designing an autonomous loop, when a heartbeat cadence is being planned, when polling cadence is being tuned, or when post-hoc review of loop costs reveals interval mis-sizing.

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 the Codex Optimized Development, Evaluation, and Remediation (CODER) Loop with an orchestration-only coordinator, non-overlapping task-family owners, fresh independent reviewers, evidence-scoped remediation, and final coordinator acceptance. Discover and compose optional MSW, Timebox, MSL, and Codex Voice Optimizer companions as the Slopware Dev Stack without making them dependencies. Use in Codex when the user invokes the CODER Loop, asks to divide a complex change into bounded implementation families with independent reviewers, requests multi-agent implementation without overlapping ownership, requires review and repair until every blocking gap is independently rechecked, asks for the CODER tutorial or Slopware Dev Stack, or wants CODER to install or use its companions. Do not trigger for an ordinary single-agent change, a review-only request, or a non-Codex host.

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。

Delegate implementation work to a dedicated implementer subagent, then review its diff, send it back to iterate, gate on the full test suite, and ship it as a PR. Use this whenever the user wants a separate model to write code, mentions handing off / delegating implementation, asks to work through a plan or spec unit-by-unit with a subagent doing the coding, or wants a review-and-merge loop wrapped around delegated output — and also when resuming such a loop ("keep going", "next unit", "继续下一个"). It encodes constraints that are expensive to rediscover: the implementer self-reports success, must not run the full test suite by default, must not touch git, and its report is a claim rather than evidence. Cursor port of implementation-loop. This loop expects an approved plan or an equivalently precise spec; settle an unsolved high-level goal into a plan first, using the cursor-engineering-mode skill (it ships in this same plugin).

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。

Designs human-in-the-loop review points for DAG workflows. Determines what to present to the human, how to collect feedback, and how to route approve/reject/modify decisions back into the DAG. Use when adding approval gates, designing review UX, or handling human feedback in agent workflows. Activate on "human review", "approval gate", "human-in-the-loop", "human gate", "approval workflow", "user review step". NOT for executing human gates at runtime (use dag-runtime with Temporal signals), general UX design, or chatbot conversation design.

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。

Iteratively improves a PR (GitHub), MR (GitLab), or shelved changelist (Perforce) until it reaches the repository's configured Greptile merge threshold with zero unresolved actionable comments, or until the five-review maximum is reached. Triggers Greptile review, fixes all actionable comments, pushes/re-shelves, re-triggers review only for new head SHAs unless a 5/5 score is already published, and repeats. Use when the user wants to optimize a PR/MR/CL against Greptile's code review standards without creating runaway review 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。

[Code Quality] Use when you need to combine /why-review + /fix in a recursive loop — each round runs /why-review to find validated findings then /fix to resolve them, then loops again over the CHANGED target until a fresh full /why-review produces zero findings (nothing left to fix).

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 Quality] Use when you need to combine /changes-review + /fix in a recursive loop — each round runs /changes-review (report-only) to surface validated findings over a fixed diff scope, then /fix to resolve them, then loops again with a FRESH full /changes-review over the CHANGED diff until one complete pass produces zero validated findings (nothing left to fix).

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 to set up a recurring, self-running marketing workflow — a repeatable loop an AI agent runs on a cadence (weekly, daily, on a trigger) rather than a one-off task. Also use when the user mentions 'marketing loop,' 'recurring marketing workflow,' 'automate my marketing,' 'marketing on autopilot,' 'weekly marketing review,' 'ad fatigue check,' 'content refresh loop,' 'churn watch,' 'ranking drop alert,' 'always-on marketing,' 'marketing automation workflow,' or 'run this every week.' Use this to pick, adapt, and schedule an ongoing marketing loop that orchestrates the other marketing skills. For one-off marketing ideas, see marketing-ideas. For the experimentation loop specifically, see ab-testing.

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。

Checks whether AI-assisted work defines review criteria, accessible context, explicit review loop, human judgment boundary, and feedback capture before delegating to an 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。

River Review のメインエントリポイント。 レビュー依頼の intent classification → 専門 skill 選択 → 実行 → finding verification → feedback classification → fixture / reference / suppression への還元までを束ねる improvement-loop orchestrator。

Sanguo event review loop with LangGraph Studio visualization. Use for: 三國事件審核、generic event candidates、battle candidates、event review MCQ、accepted/rejected events、promote events、LangGraph Studio、human-in-the-loop、事件候選可視化、chunk -> extract -> validate -> review -> publish。

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。

AIエージェントが継続して作業するループを、品質確認と評価、失敗時の停止・再実行の方針を組み合わせて設計し、進捗停滞や再試行に対処するスキル。

• 継続作業のループ方式を選びたいとき
• 品質確認と評価を組み合わせたいとき
• 失敗や進捗停滞からの復旧

Copilot left 14 review comments on your PR — half are nits. Hours of fix → reply → resolve → re-request, and each round lands MORE comments. This skill runs loop engineering: auto-triggers Copilot Code Review via GraphQL (no @copilot mention), triages every open thread (Copilot, humans, advanced-security) with a fix / decline / escalate rubric, dispatches parallel fix sub-agents that obey the repo build/test/lint conventions, commits per iteration, replies+resolves citing the pushed SHA, then re-triggers until HEAD is reviewed with zero threads awaiting the agent's reply (remaining open threads are explicit hand-offs to the human — escalated declines, design tradeoffs). You merge a clean PR; the bot runs it. Trigger phrases: "address copilot comments", "run a copilot review loop", "fix this PR", "iterate on copilot feedback". Repo-agnostic, gh CLI + PowerShell. Full autopilot needs repo Triage/Write; external PR authors get single-iteration mode plus manual re-trigger (UI 🔄 or substantive-commit push).

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 Apache ShardingSphere or user-authorized downstream pull requests and PR discussions from public or authorized repository evidence. Use for code-correctness or mergeability decisions, CI-focused review, root-cause and regression analysis, complete consolidated findings, copy-ready committer feedback, challenged findings, multi-round review, and formal review of local implementation candidates in the repository completion loop.

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。

Autonomous multi-round research review loop. In Copilot CLI it defaults to the native complementary rubber-duck subagent with host-event model evidence; elsewhere it uses Codex, while explicit external reviewer overrides remain available. Implements fixes and re-reviews until a policy-approved positive assessment or max rounds is reached.

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 LoopX must manage a multi-PR or multi-MR delivery program across one or more repositories: inventory current change requests, reconcile new/merged/closed or retargeted work, preserve requirement and dependency priorities, maintain a roadmap document, or monitor material lifecycle/check/review changes over time. Use provider-neutral snapshots and one grouped continuous monitor; do not use for deep per-PR code review, approval, commenting, or merge actions.

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。

SUPERSEDED by /claudex-loop (formerly /crucible; its docs-aware mode covers this variant) — prefer that skill unless you explicitly want this one. Two-act plan hardening with living documentation. ACT 1 (you ↔ Claude) — Claude interviews you relentlessly about a plan, one question at a time, challenging it against your project's existing domain model and glossary (CONTEXT.md), sharpening fuzzy terms, stress-testing with concrete scenarios, cross-referencing code, and updating CONTEXT.md + ADRs inline as decisions crystallise. ACT 2 (Claude ↔ Codex) — Claude writes the locked plan to PLAN.md and OpenAI Codex adversarially reviews it in a read-only sandbox (VERDICT:APPROVED/REVISE), Claude revises and re-submits to the SAME Codex session until APPROVED or a MAX_ROUNDS cap, then you sign off before any code. Use when the user says "/grill-with-docs-codex", "grill me against the docs then have codex review", "stress-test this against our domain model then get a second model on it", or is about to build something high-stakes in a project with established terminology/ADRs and wants alignment, documentation, AND a cross-model sanity check. Builds on Matt Pocock's grill-with-docs (MIT). NOT for reviewing already-written code (use /codex:review) and NOT for trivial 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。

Comprehensive manuscript review with three modes: single-pass (default), --adversarial critic-fixer loop, and --peer [journal] simulated peer-review pipeline (editor + 2 dispositioned referees + editorial decision, calibrated to a target journal). R&R continuation via --peer --r2/--r3; hostile-editor stress test via --peer --stress; reviewer-disposition variance reporting via --peer --variance N. Auto-invokes /review-r + /audit-reproducibility on referenced scripts unless --no-cross-artifact.

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。