1.2万 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Construction document review with PE judgment — RFI research, submittal analysis, coordination checking, scope gap detection. Use when reviewing drawings, specs, submittals, or RFIs. Triggers: 'review', 'coordination', 'what's missing'.
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 code review checklist and pre-commit quality gates for PRs. Use when: reviewing pull requests, checking code quality, before committing code. Keywords: review, PR, pull request, checklist, quality, commit, 審查, 檢查, 簽入.
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。
Devil's Advocate stress-testing for code, architecture, PRs, and decisions. Surfaces hidden flaws through structured adversarial analysis with metacognitive depth. Use for high-stakes review, stress-testing choices, or when the user wants problems found deliberately. NOT for routine code review. Triggers on "스트레스 테스트", "stress test", "devil's advocate", "반론", "이거 괜찮아", "문제 없을까", "깊은 리뷰", "critical review", "adversarial".
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。
Specialized research and analysis prompt methodology for Claude. Provides 11 tested approaches (3 identity, 4 reasoning, 4 output) for data analysis, policy research, systematic evidence review, investigative research, and research-specific deliverables. Use when building prompts for quantitative data interpretation, evidence-based policy recommendations, literature reviews, causal analysis, hypothesis-driven investigation, or briefing documents. Trigger on: "prompt for data analysis," "research prompt," "policy brief prompt," "literature review prompt," "prompt for investigating," "systematic review prompt," "build a prompt for evidence synthesis," "causal analysis prompt," "briefing document prompt." Also use when user describes a research or analytical task and needs a structured Claude prompt for it. Do NOT use for evaluating existing prompts (use rootnode-prompt-validation if available) or auditing Claude Projects (use rootnode-project-audit if 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。
Review web design for layout quality, typography, colour usage, spacing, responsive behaviour, brand consistency, and visual hierarchy. Covers design principles evaluation and improvement recommendations. Use when reviewing a design mockup before development, assessing an implemented site for design quality, providing feedback during a design review session, evaluating brand consistency, or checking responsive behaviour across breakpoints.
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 user experience and interface design using Nielsen's heuristics, WCAG 2.1 accessibility guidelines, keyboard and screen reader audit, user flow analysis, cognitive load assessment, and form usability evaluation. Use when conducting a usability review before release, assessing WCAG 2.1 accessibility compliance, evaluating user flows for efficiency, reviewing form design, or performing a heuristic evaluation of an existing interface.
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 software architecture for coupling, cohesion, SOLID principles, API design, scalability, and technical debt. Covers system-level evaluation, architecture decision record review, and improvement recommendations. Use when evaluating a proposed architecture before implementation, assessing an existing system for scalability or security, reviewing ADRs, performing a technical debt assessment, or evaluating readiness for significant scale-up.
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 a SKILL.md file for compliance with the agentskills.io standard. Checks YAML frontmatter fields, required sections, line count limits, procedure step format, and registry synchronization. Use when a new skill needs format validation before merge, an existing skill has been modified and requires re-validation, performing a batch audit of all skills in a domain, or reviewing a contributor's skill submission in a pull request.
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。
Create and manage pull requests using GitHub CLI. Covers branch preparation, writing PR titles and descriptions, creating PRs, handling review feedback, and merge/cleanup workflows. Use when proposing changes from a feature or fix branch for review, merging completed work into the main branch, requesting code review from collaborators, or documenting the purpose and scope of a set of 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。
Structured GitHub issue creation from review findings or task breakdowns. Groups related findings into logical issues, applies labels, and produces issues with standard templates including summary, findings, and acceptance criteria. Designed to consume output from review-codebase or similar review skills.
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。
Independently review a Proto UI change against current authority, bounded scope, executable evidence, projections, provenance, and integration conditions. Use for pull-request review, acceptance review, pre-merge audit, or fresh-context verification. Do not use to approve one's own work.
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。
Inspect one bounded Proto UI pull-request slice, produce canonical review input, and route each eligible exact head toward review and integration. Use for review queues, linked work, evidence gaps, merge conflicts, stale revisions, or portfolio health. This evidence leaf is read-only; authorized review and integration continue in their registered leaves.
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 code review on staged changes or a pull request. Checks for bugs, security issues, performance problems, and best practices. Use when user says "review code", "check my code", "review PR", or "is this code okay". Optional +check flag validates findings via a fresh-context subagent.
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。
Perform code review on staged changes or a pull request. Checks for bugs, security issues, performance problems, and best practices. Use when user says "review code", "check my code", "review PR", or "is this code okay". Optional +check flag validates findings via a fresh-context subagent.
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。
Eng manager-mode plan review. Lock in the execution plan — architecture, data flow, diagrams, edge cases, test coverage, performance. Walks through issues interactively with opinionated recommendations. Use when asked to "review the architecture", "engineering review", or "lock in the plan".
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-platform review analysis — pulls Yelp/Google/TripAdvisor reviews, identifies recurring complaints, sentiment patterns, response rate, and rating trajectory
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。
Software Factory 2026秋の開発フローをこのsessionに適用する。 着手前に不明点をユーザーに質問、変更が一段落したらcodexでbug確認、draft PR作成、対話コンテキストexport、インラインレビューコメントの草稿、ユーザーの指示でsanity-review、ready for review後のsquash and mergeのcommit message草稿の提示、という進め方を定める。 開発の開始時にユーザーが手動で起動する。
Evaluate code (especially LLM-generated) for structural simplicity using Rich Hickey's "Simple Made Easy" framework. Use this skill whenever reviewing a PR, diff, or code snippet for accidental complexity — particularly when the code was generated by an AI coding assistant and line-by-line review isn't feasible. Also use when the user asks about complecting, simplicity vs. easiness, structural coupling, or concept deduplication. Trigger on phrases like "is this simple", "does this complect", "review for complexity", "structural analysis", or any reference to Hickey, Simple Made Easy, or grey-box 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。
Reviews integration completeness including design-implementation consistency, review/test coverage, and completion criteria. Use when performing integration review in Construction Phase.
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 code for quality and security issues. Combines code quality review with security vulnerability detection. Use when reviewing code after generation in Construction Phase.
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 strict-mode sprint contract review after Phase 2c. Spawns a fresh vcsdd-adversary instance to review `contracts/sprint-N.md` and writes a PASS/FAIL verdict under `reviews/contracts/sprint-N/output/`.
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 literature-review workflow for a research topic. Use this skill to draft up to 10 search keywords, build a seed set from OpenAlex title-and-abstract matches, expand by backward and forward citations, screen candidates by title and abstract, repeat until no new relevant papers remain, rank the final set, inspect up to 30 full texts, build a concept-reference knowledge graph, and write a literature review grounded only in the final included references.
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。
Complete operational workflow for implementer agents (Codex, Gemini, etc.) making code changes and writing tests. Drives all work through atomic commits — each loop operates on the smallest complete, reviewable change. Defines the Code Change Loop, Test Writing Loop, Lint Gate, and Issue Filing process with circuit breakers, severity levels, and escalation rules. Requires `committer` for all commits. Includes bundled provider-aware review scripts that keep same-model shell-outs as the last resort, plus a fresh-context Codex fallback for code review and test audit. Use this skill when starting any implementation task.
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。