「rev」の検索結果

N-round adversarial review pipeline for empirical research output — the chain from data to LaTeX tables to a manuscript that cites them. A Claude drafter proposes minimal diffs, a deterministic mechanical battery gates every diff from a clean state with a regression gate, a Codex reviewer files check-backed critiques, and a blind judge panel decides residual disputes. Manual-invoke ONLY: trigger when the user explicitly runs /adversarial-empirical-review or names 'adversarial-empirical-review' / 'adversarial empirical review'. Do NOT auto-trigger on generic 'review my results', 'check my tables', or manuscript-editing requests. For prose-style refinement use style-emulation instead; this skill AUDITS WHETHER THE TABLES ARE CORRECT — that each number in the tables is what the analysis code computes, reproduces from the data, and is internally consistent. It is an empirical + code review: the manuscript is read only to resolve table numbering, and prose is not examined.

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。

Comprehensive UI/UX design review with live environment testing, responsive validation, accessibility compliance (WCAG 2.1 AA), and visual consistency analysis using Playwright. Use when user runs /design-review, /review:design-review, requests a "design review", "UI review", "UX audit", or mentions "review the design", "check accessibility", "responsive testing".

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。

Ultra-compressed code review comments. Cuts noise from PR feedback while preserving the actionable signal. Each comment is one line: location, problem, fix. Use when user says "review this PR", "code review", "review the diff", "/review", or invokes /caveman-review. Auto-triggers when reviewing pull requests.

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。

Configuring and running Pipeline Inspection in Sales Cloud: enabling the feature, mapping forecast categories into the inspection view, Days in Stage and other deal-change metrics, and pipeline review cadence for sales managers. Use when designing or improving how a team monitors deal health and pipeline movement. NOT for the Revenue Intelligence app, Einstein deal insights, or forecast-accuracy dashboards — use admin/revenue-intelligence-setup. NOT for forecast types, quotas, or forecast hierarchy setup — use admin/collaborative-forecasts. Keywords: pipeline review, coverage ratio, stage conversion, slippage, stale deals, days in stage, LastStageChangeInDays, LastStageChangeDate, AgeInDays, PushCount, ForecastCategoryName, enablePipelineInspection, PipelineInspMetricConfig, OpportunitySettings, review cadence, commit call.

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。

WCAG 準拠のアクセシビリティチェックをチェックリスト駆動で実行するスキル。 コンポーネント・ページ・PR に対して Pass/Fail/N/A/Needs review の構造化レポートを 生成し、エビデンスと修正案を提示する。 「アクセシビリティチェック」「a11y チェック」「WCAG をチェック」「a11y レビュー」 「アクセシビリティ監査」「WCAG 準拠確認」「アクセシビリティレポート」への言及、 または PR やコンポーネントのアクセシビリティレビュー依頼で発動する。 English: "check accessibility", "a11y audit", "a11y check", "WCAG review", "accessibility report", "screen reader test", "review for a11y", "review this PR for accessibility", "axe audit"

Use when reviewing or auditing a library of Claude Code skills, agents, slash commands, and workflows — frontmatter correctness, routing quality, tool allowlists, command arg-hints, workflow meta/phase coherence, cross-reference coherence, single-responsibility, file structure, and anti-pattern detection. Triggers on mentions of "review skills", "audit agents", "skill library", "agent definition review", "review this command", "review this workflow", "is this skill right", or when iterating on `.claude/skills/`, `.claude/agents/`, `.claude/commands/`, or `.claude/workflows/` directories. For code review of source code see code-review-and-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。

Conducts multi-axis code review across correctness, readability, architecture, security, and performance. Use before merging any change. Use when reviewing code written by yourself, another agent, or a human. Triggers on "review my PR", "review this diff", "code review", "review this changeset", "is this ready to merge", "pre-merge 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。

Ultra-compressed code review comments. Cuts noise from PR feedback while preserving the actionable signal. Each comment is one line: location, problem, fix. Use when user says "review this PR", "code review", "review the diff", "/review", or invokes /caveman-review. Auto-triggers when reviewing pull requests.

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。

Ultra-compressed code review comments. Cuts noise from PR feedback while preserving the actionable signal. Each comment is one line: location, problem, fix. Use when user says "review this PR", "code review", "review the diff", "/review", or invokes /caveman-review. Auto-triggers when reviewing pull requests.

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 author's manuscript, its argument and paragraph structure, analyze reviewer comments, draft rebuttals, and verify revisions. Use for self-review, structural edit plans, simulated reviewer objections, author responses, revision closure, and submission-readiness assessment. Formal assigned peer review is outside this skill; manuscript edits and final figures/tables use their owning 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。

Reviews a proposal, business case, deck, plan or contract summary in character as a General Counsel archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage or clause, legal risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Meeting preparation, not legal advice. Use when the user asks to "run a general counsel review", "what would legal say about this", "pressure-test the legal exposure in this deal" or "prepare me for the deal committee". Do not use for price, term, renewal or vendor leverage, use procurement-reviewer instead; for lawful basis and data flows, use cdo-reviewer; for security controls, use ciso-reviewer. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

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 a proposal, business case, deck or rollout plan in character as a Frontline Sceptic archetype, the experienced staff member who will live with the change, and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage, adoption risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a frontline review", "give me the shop-floor view of this rollout", "pressure-test adoption of this plan" or "what will the team actually say about this". Do not use for employee consultation, monitoring or works council preparation, use works-council-reviewer instead; for people strategy or restructuring, use chro-reviewer; for product evidence, use cpo-reviewer. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

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 a proposal, business case, deck or vendor contract in character as a Head of Procurement archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage or clause, commercial risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "review this from a procurement angle", "what would procurement say about this proposal", "pressure-test this vendor contract commercially", "find the holes before the sourcing committee" or "check the renewal terms like a Head of Procurement would". Do not use for liability, IP, regulatory or signing-authority questions, use general-counsel-reviewer instead; for whether the spend fits the budget, use cfo-reviewer; for vendor security, use ciso-reviewer. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

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 a proposal, business case, deck or plan in character as a Chief Financial Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage, finance risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CFO review", "pressure-test the numbers in this business case", "what would a CFO say about this", "challenge the payback and run costs" or "prepare this for the investment committee". Do not use for delivery or capacity questions, use coo-reviewer instead; for architecture or vendor questions, use cto-reviewer; for positioning or demand, use cmo-reviewer. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

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 a proposal, business case, deck or product plan in character as a Chief Product Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage, product and adoption risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CPO review", "pressure-test this product plan", "what would a CPO say about this", "challenge the user evidence" or "check the roadmap opportunity cost". Do not use for positioning, messaging or launch marketing, use cmo-reviewer instead; for internal staff adoption of a rollout, use frontline-skeptic-reviewer; for what a change asks of paying customers, use customer-advocate-reviewer. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

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 wants to improve their app's star rating, increase ratings volume, optimize when and how they prompt users for a review, or recover from a bad rating period. Use when the user mentions "app rating", "star rating", "review prompt", "SKStoreReviewRequest", "In-App Review API", "ask for review", "low rating", "rating drop", "get more reviews", or "recover from 1-star". For responding to reviews, see review-management. For overall ASO health, see aso-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。

Senior engineering analyst for code review, plan review, and automation review. Four-lens review covering architecture, code quality, reliability, and performance, each scored 1-10. Delivers APPROVE, REVISE, or REJECT verdicts. Use when you need a code review, plan review, quality check, or want to verify work before shipping. Part of the architect-system loop. Reads from system/blueprints/ and source code. Outputs to system/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。

Senior engineering analyst for code review, plan review, and automation review. Use when: (1) "review this", "analyze the code", "check this plan", (2) After implementation to verify quality, (3) "is this good enough?", (4) Before marking a task complete, (5) Reviewing a blueprint from /architect, (6) Reviewing output from /refinery. Four-lens review: architecture, code quality, reliability, performance. Reads from system/blueprints/ and source code. Outputs to system/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。

親イシュー配下のサブイシュー（孫以下の全子孫を含む）を依存順を保ちつつ worktree で並列に自動実装・push 前 review・PR 作成・CI 監視・マージ可能状態化まで一括自動化。 「イシューツリーを並列実装」「配下のサブイシューをまとめて実装」「ツリー全体を並列で実装して」「イシュー階層を自動開発」で使用。 per-issue 計画立案（Plan: セッション継承モデル）→実装（Implement: sonnet）の分業。push 前 review（Review 通過後にのみ push・PR 作成して CI を 1 回だけ起動）。 外部チェック構成は args の externalChecks で明示（{"app", "context"} の組で宣言。[] で「なし」を確定して不要待機なし・未指定なら自動マージ停止・slug のみの旧形式は自動マージ fail-closed）。 自動 squash merge は autoMerge: true + externalChecks 明示（全 App の信頼済み context 宣言込み）の opt-in で実行（merge-exec の自己取得再検証 + サーバー側 branch protection 実測が前提。既定 false はマージ可能状態で停止し人間がマージ。サーバー側 workflow サンプル（upstream の docs/implement-issue-tree/auto-merge-sample.yml 参照）+ branch protection への委譲も可）。並列度（parallel）と依存（dependsOn）で実行順を制御。 Phase 単位で厳密に直列化したい場合は phaseGate: true（opt-in。ルート直下の子〔Phase 親〕を sub-issues リスト順に直列化し、前 Phase の全子孫が merged/closed になるまで次 Phase 配下に着手しない。既定 false は現行の post-order 優先度のみ）。 着手できる件数・blocked になる件数を事前に知りたい場合は dryRun: true（何も書かずに見積りだけ返す）。 単一イシューの実装は implement-issue、PR レビューは implement-review-pr を参照。

Independent, traceable code review of one SDD Composy task in review_required against its approved PRD, stories, TechSpec, evidence, and project rules, with stable findings and severities. Use when a task passed QA and evidence — 'revisar a TASK-003', 'code review da task', 'review this task's diff'. Do NOT use for code review outside an SDD workspace (use the host code review), for QA (sdd-qa), or for verification (sdd-verify).

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。

Auto-review pipeline — reads the full CEO, design, eng, and DX review skills from disk and runs them sequentially with auto-decisions using 6 decision principles. Surfaces taste decisions (close approaches, borderline scope, codex disagreements) at a final approval gate. One command, fully reviewed plan out. Use when asked to "auto review", "autoplan", "run all reviews", "review this plan automatically", or "make the decisions for me". Proactively suggest when the user has a plan file and wants to run the full review gauntlet without answering 15-30 intermediate questions. (gstack) Voice triggers (speech-to-text aliases): "auto plan", "automatic 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。

Use this skill when previewing files with nuxt-ui-tools as a package consumer. Covers mounting UiFilePreviewProvider, opening one file or a gallery with useFilePreview() or useNuxtApp().$filePreview, file descriptors (URL, File/Blob, or a function that returns a signed URL), options (index, mode, gallery, loop, pdf page, callbacks), the returned handle, the built-in renderers (image, video, audio, PDF, text/JSON, CSV, Markdown, Office and archive fallbacks), renditions, download and custom header actions, the markdown render hook, custom renderers with defineFilePreviewRenderer and UiFilePreviewTools, theming tokens, and how the upload field uses the preview.

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。

機能の実装後やマージ前に、別のエージェントへコードレビューを依頼します。変更内容と要件、対象のコミットを渡し、指摘の重要度に応じて修正を進めるスキルです。

• 大きな機能を実装した後のレビュー
• マージ前に変更を確認したいとき
• 複雑な不具合修正への第三者確認

Quality review of a change: is the logic right, is it safe, does it hold under real load, is risky code tested, is it fast enough, and is every line needed. Reads the connected code, not only the diff. Each finding is explained in plain English. Use for "review this", "code review", "review the last commit", "review my PR", "is this over-engineered", /ponytail-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。