「rev」の検索結果

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。

Adversarial code review using the opposite model. Spawns 1–3 reviewers on the opposing model (Claude spawns Codex, Codex spawns Claude) to challenge work from distinct critical lenses. Triggers: "adversarial 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。

Adversarial code review using the opposite model's CLI. Spawns 1–3 reviewers on the opposing model (Codex sessions typically spawn Claude; Claude sessions spawn Codex) to challenge work from distinct critical lenses. Triggers: "adversarial 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。

Review test quality and coverage. Use when the user says "test review" or "review tests"

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 Grok 4.5 as the required external design advisor when a task needs UI critique, UX critique, component-choice review, interaction-flow review, design imagery markdown, art direction, visual hierarchy judgment, design-system fit, color/type/layout suggestions, HTML mockups, SVG icons, handwritten SVG wordmarks, or file-based feedback on existing UI. Trigger on requests like "design a page", "generate design imagery", "give design advice", "optimize this UI", "improve UX", "optimize user flow", "review interaction", "check usability", "reduce friction", "choose the right component", "review this design", "create an icon", "suggest colors", "UI mockup", "visual direction", "lettering", "wordmark", "handwritten logo", or when another agent needs a second opinion on visual or interaction 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。

Manage persistent coding sessions across Claude Code, Codex, Antigravity (agy), Cursor, and OpenCode engines. Use when orchestrating multi-engine coding agents, starting/sending/stopping sessions, running multi-agent council collaborations, cross-session messaging, ultraplan deep planning, ultrareview parallel code review, autoloop autonomous workspace iteration, ultraapp building deployable web apps from a structured Q&A interview, switching models/tools at runtime, exposing the orchestrator's 69 tools as an MCP server to Hermes Agent / Claude Desktop / Cursor / Cline / Continue / Zed / Windsurf / Goose, or running as an Agent Client Protocol (ACP) agent that Zed / JetBrains / Neovim / Emacs / VS Code / dsh can drive directly. Triggers on "start a session", "send to session", "run council", "ultraplan", "ultrareview", "autoloop", "ultraapp", "Forge tab", "build a web app", "one-click app", "AppSpec", "autonomous iteration", "iterate until goal", "deep paper review", "auto research", "switch model", "multi-agent", "coding session", "session inbox", "cursor agent", "opencode", "mcp server", "clawo-mcp", "hermes mcp", "model context protocol", "ultracode", "dynamic workflow", "fanout", "fan-out", "best-of-N", "steer turn", "interrupt turn", "fork thread", "rollback turns", "acp", "agent client protocol", "clawo acp", "zed agent", "jetbrains agent", "external agent", "dsh subagent", "deepseek harness".

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。

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。

Review WooCommerce code changes for coding standards compliance. Use when reviewing code locally, performing automated PR reviews, or checking code quality in WooCommerce projects.

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。

Lightweight standalone design spec for AI coding agents: codebase scan → bounded clarify pass (3–5 questions, not a grill) → reviewed design doc written to docs/plans/ → independent scored review → stop. No task board, no build. Use when you want a spec to discuss, hand off, or review before committing to implementation. Chains into absolute-work when ready to build. Triggers on "absolute spec", "write a spec", "spec out this feature", "draft a design doc", "I want a spec to hand off / review, don't build it yet".

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 review response strategy guide for RebuttalStudio. Use when developing response strategies for reviewer comments, deciding how to classify concerns, or choosing between Accept/Defend/Clarify/Experiment approaches at any stage of the rebuttal pipeline.

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 structured literature review on a given topic by defining a search strategy, applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracting key findings, and synthesizing results into a coherent academic review. Use when the user requests literature review or provides relevant inputs for this workflow.

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。

Provider-independent storyboard and previsualization direction for AI agents turning briefs, scripts, treatments, ads, films, social videos, and generated-media concepts into shot-by-shot boards, animatics, previs plans, camera/blocking/movement direction, reference packs, AI image/video prompt plans, review workflows, continuity checks, and production handoffs.

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。

Analyze customer reviews for local businesses on Google Maps. Covers review extraction, sentiment patterns, rating distribution, common complaints, and competitor review comparison for local business intelligence and reputation management.

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, implement, or review review animations work with format, accessibility, performance, and visual-verification controls. Use when the requested deliverable depends on review animations.

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 or review revenue operations deliverables with traceable assumptions, decision criteria, ownership, and risk controls. Use when the user asks for revenue operations planning or analysis.

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。

Plan, implement, or review final release review work in an existing codebase with compatibility, security, and verification controls. Use when the user explicitly requests final release review 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。

Create, implement, or review accessibility review work with format, accessibility, performance, and visual-verification controls. Use when the requested deliverable depends on accessibility 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。

Create or review churn prevention deliverables with audience, evidence, voice, and conversion-quality controls. Use when the user explicitly asks for churn prevention 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。

Move quality earlier in the development lifecycle. Covers dev/QA pairing patterns, Three Amigos sessions, TDD facilitation (Red-Green-Refactor), PR review checklists for testability, and Definition of Done with quality gates. Includes shift-left maturity model for team assessment. Use when: "shift left," "TDD," "dev-QA pairing," "definition of done," "testability," "quality culture," "QA in sprint planning." Not for: writing the unit tests themselves — use unit-testing; automated PR test-quality review at scale — use ai-qa-review; multi-quarter QA direction or roadmap — use test-strategy. Related: unit-testing, ai-qa-review, test-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。

Review the working-tree changes (vs main) for correctness, concurrency, architecture, testing, and API/doc issues — following .github/CODE_REVIEW.md — and return a severity-graded report. Scales the machinery to the diff size: a single code-reviewer agent for a small change, or a fan-out-and-verify Workflow for a large/multi-unit one. Produces findings; it does not apply fixes (the caller does).

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。

Analyze contracts for risks, check completeness, and provide actionable recommendations. Use when a user asks to review a contract, check an agreement for red flags, analyze contract terms, find risky clauses, review an NDA, evaluate a service agreement, or audit employment contract terms. Supports employment contracts, NDAs, service agreements, and vendor contracts.

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 architecture for maintainability, catch structural issues before they become debtUse when "Reviewing pull requests with structural changes, Planning refactoring work, Evaluating new feature architecture, Assessing technical debt, Before major releases, When code feels "hard to change", architecture, code-review, refactoring, design-patterns, technical-debt, dependencies, maintainability" mentioned.

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。