「rev」の検索結果

[omh] Missed route or run lessons to record: classify and review self-improvement store routes as an auxiliary review lane before durable writes, then record workflow attempts as metadata-only traces, evals, review queues, patch proposals, regression cases, audits, indexes, and exports. Use when the user says: workflow-learning, workflow learning, route-signal, self-improvement store routing, store route review, memory skill wiki routing, learning trace, learning audit.

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] AI agent progress for managers: help managers inspect AI-agent progress, blockers, quality gates, and throughput levers. Use when the user says: agent-ops-review, agent ops review, agent productivity, operator productivity, manager view, quality dashboard, throughput review, agent work 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。

[omh] Context window or token budget at risk: plan compact context, token/cost budgets, summarization checkpoints, and overflow recovery before long agent work. Use when the user says: context-budget-review, context budget review, context budget, token budget review, token budget, prompt budget, prompt caching, prompt cache.

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] Previously rejected options to revisit: recall scoped reviewed rejected decisions without elevating them to approved memory. Use when the user says: decision-recall, rejected decision recall, rejected decisions, why was this rejected, previously rejected alternative, 거절된 결정, 기각된 대안.

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] Pull request or changes to vet: bug-first review with evidence. Use when the user says: code-review, review, audit, find bugs, release gate, claim audit, evidence audit, README claim.

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。

Stops defensive writing across the entire paper lifecycle — writing, revising, cutting, and organizing experiments. Treats the paper as a press conference, not a project summary, lab log, or self-audit: identify the single most publishable strength of the work and build the most favorable, complete, and persuasive narrative around it. Never present everything evenly, never volunteer weakness, never write an experiment diary, never attack the paper on the reviewer's behalf. Triggers: polish my paper, revise manuscript, write abstract, write introduction, write conclusion, shorten paper, rebuttal, respond to reviewers, organize experiments, defensive writing, AI-flavored academic writing.

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 asked to review a PR, run a code review loop, or invoke the ralph reviewer against a pull request number or GitHub URL

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。

Role profile — a reviewer who is fact-seeking, bedrock-seeking, honest, and rejecting. Demands that arguments rest on small facts that cannot be wrong (not on stacked assumptions dressed up as foundation), and that deliberately-unclear concepts be quarantined — never leaked into solid layers, never mixed with each other. Catches the failure mode where designs ship after partial grounding: most of the spec researched, the design feels finished, and the unresearched remainder holds the deal-breaker. Invoke with `/pedantic <target>` (e.g. `/pedantic review this design doc`, `/pedantic review the SDK design`, `/pedantic review this PR`). Probes cover logical structure (definitions, assumptions, boundaries, contradictions, unfalsifiability, vague quantifiers, counterexamples), epistemic honesty (researchable vs. discoverable-only-by-doing), bedrock integrity (assumed-bedrock, leaked uncertainty, mixed unclarity), and design pathology (YAGNI, wrong-layer abstraction, unclear responsibility, fragmentation, over-engineering). Use when you want a hard critique of a plan, design doc, technical doc, code change, or PR description — not a copy edit, not a vibe 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。

Prepare PRs for review by cleaning noisy history, improving PR descriptions, and adding reviewer guidance without changing code behavior. Use for "make this easy to review", "tidy this PR", "clean up commits", or "annotate the diff".

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。

Prepare evidence-bounded, constructive peer-review drafts and structured manuscript assessments. Use for authorized review of scientific manuscripts, protocols, preprints, or research proposals; reporting-guideline selection; claim–evidence checks; methods, statistics, reproducibility, ethics, figure/table, and citation critique; or revision-response planning.

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。

Helps organize reviewer comments and generate a standardized Word (.docx) response letter that maps each change to its exact location (page/paragraph/line). Use when revising a manuscript, replying to peer-review feedback, or preparing internal review responses.

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。

Orchestrates a systematic review and meta-analysis workflow following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, from protocol development through multi-database search, screening, data extraction, and evidence synthesis. Use when conducting evidence-based reviews, meta-analyses, or scoping revi...

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 PR(s) using comprehensive review guidelines including security, correctness, clean code, TypeScript, React patterns, i18n/RTL, performance, and accessibility. Use when reviewing pull requests or code 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。

Fresh adversarial code review with binary PASS/FAIL verdicts, evidence citations, and anchoring bias prevention via fresh reviewer spawning.

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 the user asks to review, verify, or audit a report, manuscript, or analysis in the workspace for traceability — resolving citations, flagging numbers with no source, and checking figures against the code that generated them. Emits a structured review block the app renders as reviewer findings. Verifies traceability, never "correctness".

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。

Coordinate specialized code, security, architecture, and performance reviewers and consolidate their results. Use when a codebase needs parallel review across multiple disciplines.

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。

You are a PR optimization expert specializing in creating high-quality pull requests that facilitate efficient code reviews. Generate comprehensive PR descriptions, automate review processes, and ensure PRs follow best practices for clarity, size, and reviewability.

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。

Master effective code review practices to provide constructive feedback, catch bugs early, and foster knowledge sharing while maintaining team morale. Use when reviewing pull requests, establishing review standards, or mentoring developers.

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 UI code for Web Interface Guidelines compliance. Use when asked to "review my UI", "check accessibility", "audit design", "review UX", or "check my site against best practices".

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。

Prove that the file you are about to send, publish, or hand off IS the thing you mean — before it leaves your hands. Rebuild from source, check integrity, diff the derived artifact against its source, and require the recipient to echo what they received. Use before sending a paper/PDF for review, shipping a release or replication package, handing files to a coauthor or collaborator, uploading anything to an external reviewer or model, or publishing. Prevents an entire review/QA cycle from being spent on defects that exist only in the artifact, not in the 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。

Read-only R code review protocol for `.R` scripts. Checks code quality, reproducibility, domain correctness, tidyverse idioms, and professional standards; produces a report without editing. Use when user says "review this R script", "check the R code", "audit the analysis code", "code review on the R", or when an R file is touched as part of a paper submission. NOT for running the code — pair with `/audit-reproducibility` for numeric verification.

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。

Generate a structured response-to-referees document from a referee report and the revised manuscript. Maps each referee comment to the specific revision, classifies coverage (addressed / partially / deferred / disagreement), and drafts polite but firm responses. Use during the R&R (revise-and-resubmit) stage of paper 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。

Structured literature search + synthesis with citation extraction, thematic clustering, and gap identification. Use when user says "find papers on X", "do a lit review", "what's the literature on...", "summarize what we know about...", "where's the gap in this field", "review recent work on Y". Produces a written review with BibTeX-ready citations. Uses WebSearch/WebFetch for recent 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。

Mechanize Pattern 15 — the seven-pass adversarial review protocol for academic manuscripts. Spawns 7 fresh-context subagents in parallel (abstract, intro, methods, results, robustness, prose, citations), then synthesizes a prioritized revision checklist. Use for submission-ready or R&R-stage papers where single-pass review isn't enough.

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。