「rev」の検索結果

Check Pull Request on current branch, and obtain unresolved review comments. `gh` command is required. Use this when user instructed with `PR review comment` `PR レビューコメント` etc.

Legal-contract review desk (Busabase App-in-Skill) for NDAs, MSAs, DPAs, and SOWs. Use when the user invokes $kelly-legal-contracts or /kelly-legal-contracts, mentions legal, 法务, contract review, 合同审阅, NDA, MSA, DPA, SOW, redlines, clause playbook, legal intake, issue list, or wants a Busabase-backed review desk where a human legal reviewer approves, revises, or blocks agent-prepared contract issues.

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。

Inspects PostHog Visual Review (VR) runs that gate PR merges with screenshot regression checks. Use when the user mentions "visual review", "VR", "snapshot diff", "screenshot test", "storybook regression", "playwright snapshot", asks why a PR is blocked or what changed visually, wants to triage the VR backlog, decide whether a snapshot diff is real vs flaky, or check whether a story has been changing across runs. Also invoke when a PR has a failing `visual-review` status check, when a PR comment mentions "Visual review", or when the user is on a branch with an open VR run.

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 the changes since a fixed point (commit, branch, tag, or merge-base) along two axes — Standards (does the code follow this repo's documented coding standards?) and Spec (does the code match what the originating issue/PRD asked for?). Runs both reviews in parallel sub-agents and reports them side by side. Use when the user wants to review a branch, a PR, work-in-progress changes, or asks to "review since X".

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 Actions security review for workflow exploitation vulnerabilities. Use when asked to "review GitHub Actions", "audit workflows", "check CI security", "GHA security", "workflow security review", or review .github/workflows/ for pwn requests, expression injection, credential theft, and supply chain attacks. Exploitation-focused with concrete PoC scenarios.

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 to process automated PR review feedback (Copilot, Greptile, Codex) and iterate until all AI threads are addressed, checks are green, and the PR is merge-ready. Trigger when the user says "address review feedback", "recycle reviews", or references an automated 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。

Review code changes adversarially using parallel review layers (Blind Hunter, Edge Case Hunter, Acceptance Auditor) with structured triage into actionable categories. Use when the user says "run code review" or "review this code"

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 PR の CI ステータス (`gh pr checks`)・コード品質・セキュリティ (OWASP Top 10)・Conventional Commits 準拠をレビューする。`gh pr review --approve/--request-changes/--comment` でレビュー投稿も可能。「PR #N をレビュー」「PR レビューして」などで使用。ローカル diff のレビューには implement-review を使用。

自分の作業ブランチの PR 提出前セルフレビュー（diff の包括チェック）。「セルフレビューして」「消し忘れがないか確認して」「diff を徹底チェックして」「変更漏れ・削除漏れを見て」等の依頼時、PR 作成前の最終確認時に使用。境界: 他者 PR のレビューは pr-review、コードベース全体は codebase-review。

有馬記念分析システムのコメント引き算レビュー。不要コメント（コードの再掲・getter 名と同義の JSDoc）、コメント量の増えすぎ（多行ファイルヘッダ・長い @example・装飾過多・base 差分での純増）、陳腐化（コメントアウトされた旧コード・重み変更で古くなる数値コメント・理由なし TODO）、冗長・重複（同じ重み配分の説明が複数ファイルに散在）を検証する。コメントが『存在するか/1行で why を書くか』の足し算側は review-code 2.5 の責務で、本スキルはその過剰・不要を削る側を見る。Use when user says 'コメントレビュー', 'コメント量チェック', 'review comments', '不要コメント確認', or '過剰コメント'.

教員向けの研究概要レビュー(research-review等の出力.md)を入力に、学生に直接渡せる「前向きだけど抑えめ・シンプル・self-contained・優先順つき」の中間発表コメント1枚に書き換えるスキル。厳しい分析を、学生が萎えず手を動かせる建設的な行動リストへ翻訳する層。レビュー結果を学生向けに書き換えて、学生向けコメントにして、と言われたとき、または research-review --student から連鎖呼び出しされる。

permission-ledger hook が記録した permission prompt と各リポの .claude/settings.local.json から allow 昇格候補を集計し、ユーザーが選んだものだけを ai-agents/settings/claude/settings.json に反映する。 「許可ルールを見直したい」「permission prompt を減らしたい」「承認した操作を allow に入れたい」 「permission review」などと言われたときに `/permission-review` で使う。

PRレビューで受けた指摘をCLAUDE.mdのルールとして蓄積するスキル。`/review-learn` または `/review-learn #123` で使用。レビュアーの知見をチーム全体の資産に変換し、同じ指摘を繰り返さないコードベースを実現する。

Use this skill when the user requests to review, analyze, critique, or summarize academic papers, research articles, preprints, or scientific publications. Supports comprehensive structured reviews covering methodology assessment, contribution evaluation, literature positioning, and constructive feedback generation. Trigger on queries involving paper URLs, uploaded PDFs, arXiv links, or requests like "review this paper", "analyze this research", "summarize this study", or "write a peer 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 PRIMARY development workflow for the Archon project (remote-coding-agent). Use this skill instead of any PRP skills when working on Archon code. Routes to 10 specialized cookbooks based on what the user is trying to do: RESEARCH — "how does the orchestrator work?", "where is session state defined?", "trace the workflow execution flow", "what is IWorkflowStore?" INVESTIGATE — "should we use Drizzle or Prisma?", "what's the best way to add WebSockets?", "can we migrate to Turso?", "how do other projects handle rate limiting?" PRD — "write a PRD for dark mode", "spec out the notification feature", "product requirements for webhook retry" PLAN — "plan the auth refactor", "design the caching layer", "create an implementation plan for #42" IMPLEMENT — "implement the plan", "execute .claude/archon/plans/auth.plan.md", "build the feature from the plan", "code this up" REVIEW — "review PR #123", "review my changes", "code review the diff" DEBUG — "debug the failing test", "why is streaming broken?", "root cause analysis on the timeout issue" COMMIT — "commit these changes", "commit the auth refactor" PR — "create a PR", "open a pull request for this branch" ISSUE — "report this to gh", "create a gh issue", "log it in github", "file a bug for this", "create a feature request" This skill triggers on ANY development task: researching, investigating, planning, building, reviewing, debugging, committing, or shipping code. NOT for: Running Archon CLI workflows in worktrees (use /archon 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。

Revisa e melhora copy existente através de 7 passes focados (clareza, voz, e daí, prove, especificidade, emoção, risco zero) somados à detecção determinística de padrões de escrita de IA. Use quando o usuário disser "revisar copy", "melhorar esse texto", "revisão", "está parecendo IA", "polir", "dar uma olhada nesse texto", "feedback de copy", ou logo após qualquer skill copy-* gerar um rascunho. Não reescreve do zero — aprimora preservando a mensagem central.

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。

Systematically review pull requests, feature implementations, and code changes to ensure quality, maintainability, security, and adherence to best practices. Use when reviewing code before merging, conducting peer reviews, performing self-reviews, auditing code quality, checking for security vulnerabilities, ensuring consistent coding standards, verifying test coverage, assessing performance implications, evaluating architectural decisions, or providing constructive feedback to improve team code quality.

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 help with revenue operations, lead lifecycle management, or marketing-to-sales handoff processes. Also use when the user mentions 'RevOps,' 'revenue operations,' 'lead scoring,' 'lead routing,' 'MQL,' 'SQL,' 'pipeline stages,' 'deal desk,' 'CRM automation,' 'marketing-to-sales handoff,' 'data hygiene,' 'leads aren't getting to sales,' 'pipeline management,' 'lead qualification,' or 'when should marketing hand off to sales.' Use this for anything involving the systems and processes that connect marketing to revenue. For cold outreach emails, see cold-email. For email drip campaigns, see email-sequence. For pricing decisions, see pricing-strategy.

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。

Pre-landing PR review. Analyzes diff against the base branch for SQL safety, LLM trust boundary violations, conditional side effects, and other structural issues. Use when asked to "review this PR", "code review", "pre-landing review", or "check my diff". Proactively suggest when the user is about to merge or land code changes. (gstack)

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 extremely strict maintainability review for abstraction quality, giant files, and spaghetti-condition growth. Use for a thermo-nuclear code quality review, thermonuclear review, deep code quality audit, or especially harsh maintainability 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 this skill when the user requests to review, analyze, critique, or summarize academic papers, research articles, preprints, or scientific publications. Supports comprehensive structured reviews covering methodology assessment, contribution evaluation, literature positioning, and constructive feedback generation. Trigger on queries involving paper URLs, uploaded PDFs, arXiv links, or requests like "review this paper", "analyze this research", "summarize this study", or "write a peer 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。

Audit whether a "current product focus receipt" (Decision/Now/Why-now/Evidence/Not-now/Cut-suspend/First-visible-proof/ Acceptance-gate/Kill-revisit-trigger/Owner/Review-date) and the work order it gates state a real, testable decision and a real agent launch — not planning-placeholder prose that sounds like an assignment but can't be proven. Use when deciding whether to launch an agent chain against a milestone or a stated "focus," when a work order lacks explicit input/output/owner/proof-gate, or when an acceptance gate would only prove a cached UI state instead of daemon truth. NOT for distinguishing roadmap items from energy-driven sidequests (legible-roadmap-with-sidequests), reviewing a PRD/prototype for product-completeness gaps like cold start or pricing (product-reality-reviewer), or accepting already-finished work against a personal acceptance bar (port-daddy-user-surrogate-pm-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。

Generates comprehensive, context-aware code review checklists tailored to the specific codebase, programming language, and team standards. Analyzes PR diffs and suggests what reviewers should focus on.

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。

Webサービスを攻撃者目線でレビューし、実在する攻撃ベクターに基づいて脆弱性を発見・整理するスキル。 静的レビューと実証検証は別サブエージェントに委任し、メインセッションは両者の結果を 査読・比較して次アクションを判断する。Medium以上の実証済み所見、または実証未了でも 優先度が高い所見がある場合はメインセッションで対策プランの作成を促す。 Trigger: 脆弱性レビュー, セキュリティ診断, 攻撃者目線レビュー, ペネトレーション観点, /dev:attack-surface-review, attack surface review, pentest perspective, exploit path