「rev」の検索結果

Comprehensive GitHub code review with AI-powered swarm coordination

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。

This skill should be used when the user needs to perform year-end closing adjustments (決算整理), review financial statements (決算書), compute depreciation, or review their trial balance. Trigger phrases include: "決算", "決算整理", "決算書を作る", "減価償却", "試算表", "残高試算表", "損益計算書", "貸借対照表", "BS", "PL", "期末処理", "棚卸し", "未払計上", "前払処理".

このスキルは、ユーザーが「プロンプトをレビューして」「対話履歴を分析して」「理解度を診断して」 と依頼したとき、または /prompt-review で呼び出されたときに使用する。 過去のAIエージェント対話履歴（Claude Code, GitHub Copilot Chat, Cursor, Cline, Roo Code, Windsurf, Antigravity, Gemini CLI, OpenAI Codex, OpenCode）を読み取り、技術理解度・プロンプティングパターン・AI依存度を推定してレポートを生成する。

Provides security review capability for TypeScript/Node.js applications, validates code against XSS, injection, CSRF, JWT/OAuth2 flaws, dependency CVEs, and secrets exposure. Use when performing security audits, before deployment, reviewing authentication/authorization implementations, or ensuring OWASP compliance for Express, NestJS, and Next.js. Triggers on "security review", "check for security issues", "TypeScript security 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。

When the user asks for a code review, shares code for feedback, or says "review this", "check my code", "what's wrong with this". Also activate when reviewing a pull request or 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。

Reviews pitch decks and investor presentations. Reads slide content, evaluates narrative flow, problem/solution clarity, market sizing, competitive positioning, financial projections, team credibility, and ask clarity. Generates a scored pitch-review.md with slide-by-slide feedback, overall score, top improvements, investor objection predictions, and comparisons to successful decks. Use when reviewing fundraising materials, investor decks, or pitch presentations.

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。

Respond to Google, Yelp, and industry reviews in the owner's voice -- gracious on the 5-stars, masterful on the 1-stars. Handles the angry customer, the unfair review, the fake review, and the one that mentions a legal or health issue. Every response written for the thousand future customers reading it.

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。

Aggregate and analyze customer reviews from G2, Capterra, Trustpilot, App Store, and other platforms. Performs sentiment analysis, identifies pain points, extracts feature feedback, generates marketing claims, and compares competitor reviews. Use when users need review analysis, competitive intelligence, or customer feedback insights.

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。

Performs a deep code review of files, modules, a diff, or a branch - finding security vulnerabilities (mapped to OWASP Top 10:2025), correctness bugs, performance problems, and maintainability issues - and returns severity-ranked findings with evidence and concrete fixes. Use when the user asks to review, audit, or sanity-check code, asks "is this safe", "what's wrong with this", "find bugs", or wants a security or performance pass before shipping. For posting line comments on a GitHub pull request, use git-pr-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。

Orchestrates multi-domain review (code, arch, tests, security) in a single pass. Use when thorough pre-release review is needed.

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 pull requests with scope validation, requirements compliance, and line comments. Use when reviewing GitHub or GitLab PRs.

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。

Convenes a multi-LLM expert panel to pressure-test hard-to-reverse decisions. Use when reversibility score is low and adversarial review is warranted.

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 checking your own manuscript before submission from a reviewer's perspective. Returns anticipated Major/Minor comments with fixes, including numerical, citation and leakage checks, with an optional multi-reviewer panel. Someone else's paper is /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。

原始人スタイル subagent への委譲判断ガイド。`genshijin-investigator` (コード位置特定)、 `genshijin-builder` (1-2ファイル編集)、`genshijin-reviewer` (diff レビュー) を inline作業 or vanilla `Explore` の代わりにスポーンするタイミングを示す。subagent 出力は原始人圧縮 → 主コンテキストに戻る tool-result が約60%縮小 → 長セッション持続。 Trigger: 「subagent 委譲」「genshijin-crew 使用」「investigator/builder/reviewer 起動」「コンテキスト節約」「圧縮 agent 出力」。

Recover and review local human-AI conversations from Claude Code, Codex, opencode, Grok Build, and Cursor. Use when the user wants to revisit, search, extract, summarize, or compare work across Agent session stores, time ranges, projects, or named conversations. Follow the user's requested output; question clustering, problem-space mapping, artifact review, drift analysis, and insights are optional lenses.

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 AAS stack manifests, preview plans and selection evidence in Workbench without applying 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。

Guides systematic review of processing documentation for completeness against GDPR Articles 5, 13-14, 24, 28, and 30. Activate when auditing documentation or preparing for inspections. Keywords: documentation review, processing records, completeness, privacy notices, RoPA.

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。

Produces a human-readable, progressive-disclosure overview of unfamiliar code or a pull request's changes — why it exists (the real problem it solves or goal it serves for the business or a user), and from there what it does, how it flows, and where to start — so you can get up to speed before working on or reviewing it. Use when you want to understand, get oriented in, make sense of, explain, or get up to speed on a chunk of code, a file, a directory, a symbol, or a PR's changes. Writes the overview to a scratch file and changes no code. Does not review code quality or raise findings — use code-review for auditing changes or post-code-review-to-pr for posting them. Does not produce durable feature or system documentation — use project-documentation. Does not assess architecture or structural risk — use architectural-analysis. Does not diagnose bugs or root-cause failures — use investigate. Does not pace a person through the code one step at a time in conversation — use code-walkthrough.

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。

Evidence-based investigation of issues, bugs, API calls, integrations, and other aspects of software development that need a deep dive to find the root cause and solutions. Use when you need to debug, troubleshoot, diagnose, or figure out why something is broken. Does not review code for quality or style — use code-review for auditing changes or post-code-review-to-pr for posting review feedback to GitHub. Does not assess architectural health or structural risk — use architectural-analysis for architectural concerns. Does not research open-ended options, prior art, or how something works when nothing is broken — use research for that. Does not plan the structural change a root cause calls for — use plan-a-change. Does not map bounded contexts or domain boundaries — use ddd-analysis. Does not capture feedback on Han's own skills — use han-feedback for that.

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 code through a disciplined, BDD-framed Test-Driven Development loop: build a behavior test list, then drive each behavior through red-green-refactor with an enforced observed-failure gate. Use when the user wants to implement, build, or write code test-first, "do TDD", follow "red-green-refactor", drive code from tests, choose the next test by the Transformation Priority Premise (TPP) or ZOMBIES ordering, or grow a feature behavior-by-behavior with tests leading. This skill writes and changes code; it does not produce a test plan document (use automated-test-planning, or manual-test-planning for a plan a person runs by hand), review or audit existing code (use code-review), restructure existing code outside a TDD loop (use refactor, or plan-a-change to plan a multi-module restructure), specify what a feature should do (use plan-a-feature), or find the root cause of a bug (use investigate). Runs its loop to completion without pausing for review; to review each behavior 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。

Produce a standalone test plan by analyzing code for test coverage gaps and edge cases. Use when you need to create, generate, or draft a test plan for a branch, need to analyze test coverage, or need to identify what tests to write for specific files or directories. Does not produce a plain-language plan for a person to run tests by hand — use manual-test-planning for that. Does not write test code — use tdd to implement behavior test-first. Does not refine existing plans — use iterative-plan-review. Does not review code quality, security, or style — use code-review for full code review. Does not evaluate architectural testability or structural coupling — use architectural-analysis for architectural assessment.

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 an implemented RFC in a fresh context against its acceptance criteria, RULES.md and the test plan, and save the review to reviews/.

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 before an agent-produced diff is committed, pushed, opened as a PR, merged, landed, or applied to user files when explicit implementation approval is missing. Trigger for review gate, review pack, approve before landing, diff first then land, human approval, merge gate, commit gate, push gate, or PR readiness. Produces a concise review pack, records risks and verification, and blocks landing until a human explicitly approves or approves with required fixes.

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 an openai-guardrails-python release plan or final release candidate against the previous remote tag, determine the compatible release type, audit runtime and packaging risk, inspect current CI, and produce an English ship-or-block report. Use for pre-release readiness checks, not ordinary PR review or 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。