1.2万 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
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. Defines the Code Change Loop, Test Writing Loop, and Issue Filing process with circuit breakers, severity levels, and escalation rules. Includes bundled scripts for specialist-review (code review) and test-review-request (test audit) that delegate to Claude CLI. 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。
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。
Deep review — random exploration + cross-agent review, alternating. Finds integration bugs that self-review misses. Run every 30–60 min during active implementation.
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 Playwright tests for quality. Use when user says "review tests", "check test quality", "audit tests", "improve tests", "test code review", or "playwright best practices check".
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 explicit end-to-end goal loop with frozen Scope/criteria, worker delegation, external verification, evaluator review, and bounded retries. Use when the user asks for 'goal-loop', 'ゴールまで回す', '必ずやり遂げる', 'loop until done', 'until it actually works', or an orchestrator + evaluator loop. Do not use for ordinary planning, casual advice, reviews, or small single-file fixes.
Guide for simplifying and refining code after coding sessions. Use when cleaning up complex code, reviewing PRs for readability, or applying consistent refactoring patterns. Triggers on simplify code, refactor, clean up, code review, コード整理, リファクタ, 複雑さ削減, コードレビュー.
Take one new feature slice from idea to reviewed, committed code in a single guided pass — scope it into the smallest shippable slice, build it test-first with strict TDD, review and fix the diff, then commit it. Chains slice → test-driven-development → the built-in /code-review → git-commit. Not for reviewing an existing PR, upgrades, or open-ended design questions.
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-powered multi-agent code review. Simulates a team of Principal Engineers reviewing code from different perspectives. Use when asked to review code, check a PR, analyze changes, or perform code 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。
"Conduct a systematic literature review following the PRISMA framework with explicit search strategy, inclusion and exclusion criteria, quality assessment, and transparent synthesis. Use this skill when the user needs to design a reproducible literature search, apply PRISMA flow documentation, develop inclusion and exclusion criteria, assess study quality, or when they ask 'how do I do a systematic review', 'what is PRISMA', or 'how do I make my literature review reproducible'.".
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 independently reviewing a research-paper draft before submission, running a mock top-conference panel, assessing readiness or accept/reject risk, or predicting reviewer concerns for venues such as CVPR, ICCV, ECCV, ICLR, NeurIPS, and AAAI. Does not draft or audit author responses after official reviews arrive.
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。
Write balanced, evidence-based performance reviews for employees. Covers achievements, development areas, and goal setting using the SBI (Situation-Behavior-Impact) feedback model. Produces reviews that are fair, legally defensible, and growth-oriented. Use during annual or semi-annual review cycles. Do not use for disciplinary actions, PIPs, or compensation calculations.
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, either de-novo, or augment the review of an existing one. A list of deep research providers may be specified.
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。
Curate, review, or repair ai-gene-review ModuleReview YAML documents under modules/, including pathway/module boundary setting, parts and variant modeling, annoton-level molecular functions, representative UniProt/PTN grounding, module deep-research provenance, validation, rendering, and project batch updates.
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。
Work with BioReason-Pro predictions and reasoning traces for protein function. Use when: comparing BioReason outputs against curated reviews, converting web exports to YAML, reviewing reasoning trace quality, or running the SFT/RL comparison. Triggers: "bioreason", "GO-GPT predictions", "reasoning trace review", "bioreason comparison", "SFT vs RL".
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 pull requests, branch diffs, and uncommitted changes in this Flutter repository with a bug-finding mindset. Use when asked to review changes, review a PR, audit a diff, check standards, check compliance, or look for regressions, missing tests, release risks, or architecture mismatches.
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 review patterns, feedback principles. Use when reviewing PRs, implementations, or making approval/rejection decisions. Covers self-correction, progress tracking, feedback principles, severity levels.
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。
CLI code review patterns. Use when reviewing CLI applications built with Commander.js, @clack/prompts, picocolors. Covers exit codes, signal handling, error messages, user experience, testing adequacy.
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 integration review patterns. Use when reviewing model API calls, prompt construction, LLM output handling, RAG pipelines, and tool-calling code. Covers prompt-injection call-chain tracing, output validation, token budgets, retry/timeout handling, streaming, and key/PII exposure.
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。
Infrastructure code review patterns. Use when reviewing CI/CD workflows, Dockerfiles, deployment configs, and IaC. Covers supply-chain pinning, secret exposure, container hygiene, least-privilege permissions, and deployment safety.
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。
UI component review patterns. Use when reviewing React components, hooks, props, state, styling, and accessibility. Covers rules of hooks, effect cleanup, render performance, list keys, keyboard and ARIA patterns.
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。
Backend code review patterns. Use when reviewing API routes, database operations, auth middleware, and server utilities. Covers injection, boundary validation, authorization coverage, secret/PII exposure, error leakage, and query patterns.
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。
Classify a proposed code change as Leaf Node or Core Code to decide how much AI usage and review rigor is appropriate. Use this skill whenever the user asks "is this leaf or core", "what kind of change is this", "should I vibe code this", "can AI write this", "how rigorous should the review be", or before starting any non-trivial change. Also useful as a sub-step inside other workflows (planning, PR prep, code review) when classification matters. Asks 6 diagnostic questions about propagation range, change frequency, tech-debt tolerance, examples, failure cost, and review intensity, then outputs a clear classification with the recommended approach. Trigger even when the user describes a change without explicitly asking for classification — the answer changes how they should proceed.
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。