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。
「review」の検索結果
1.1万 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
autoplan
無料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。
Review the current diff, or a PR number/branch/path target, for correctness bugs (plus reuse/simplification/efficiency cleanups where the model's review recipe covers them) at the given effort level (low|medium|high|xhigh|max: from few high-confidence findings up to many, some of them uncertain; ultra: deep multi-agent review in the cloud); with no level given, it reuses the level you typed last. Pass --comment to post findings as inline PR comments, or --fix to apply the findings to the working tree after the review. Pass --max-findings <n> to report up to n findings, or --max-findings all for every finding. The choice stays until you pass --max-findings default. For ultra on a GitHub.com PR target, --post asks to post the finished review’s findings to the PR as a single comment from the user’s GitHub account (not a review; the launch dialog still confirms in interactive sessions, while non-interactive mode posts on the flag alone) and --no-post hides that option.
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。
Runs one or more installed review lenses — adversarial critique, edge cases, verification gaps, structure, prose — and reports triaged findings. Use when, and only when, the user asks you to review a diff, a pull request, or an artifact — code or documents, one or many — and actually says "review"; an explicit skill:bmad-review directive from another skill counts as that ask. A request to act on feedback from an earlier review is a change, not a review. Never invoke this uninvited, including on edits you just made.
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。
Universal deep research agent team. 13-agent pipeline for rigorous academic research on any topic. 8 modes: full research, quick brief, paper review, lit-review, fact-check, three-way literature scan, Socratic guided research dialogue, and systematic review with optional meta-analysis. Covers research question formulation, Socratic mentoring, methodology design, systematic literature search, source verification, cross-source synthesis, risk of bias assessment, meta-analysis, APA 7.0 report compilation, editorial review, devil's advocate challenges, ethics review, and post-research literature monitoring. Triggers on: research, deep research, literature review, systematic review, meta-analysis, PRISMA, evidence synthesis, fact-check, WHY HOW WHAT papers, 3W literature scan, guide my research, help me think through, 研究, 深度研究, 文獻回顧, 文獻探討, 系統性回顧, 後設分析, 事實查核, 三段式文獻掃描, 引導我的研究, 幫我釐清, 幫我想想, 我不確定要研究什麼, 研究方向, 研究主題, 심층 연구, 문헌 조사, 체계적 문헌고찰, 메타분석, 사실 확인, 연구 방향을 잡아줘, 연구 주제 정하는 것을 도와줘, revisión de literatura, metaanálisis
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。
Autonomous multi-round research review loop. Repeatedly reviews using Gemini via gemini-review MCP, implements fixes, and re-reviews until positive assessment or max rounds reached. Use when user says "auto review loop", "review until it passes", or wants autonomous iterative improvement.
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。
Autonomous multi-round research review loop. Repeatedly reviews using Claude Code via claude-review MCP, implements fixes, and re-reviews until positive assessment or max rounds reached. Use when user says "auto review loop", "review until it passes", or wants autonomous iterative improvement.
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。
Two-thread adversarial review: a fresh reviewer constructs the strongest 200-word rejection memo, then a second fresh reviewer defends the paper point-by-point and surfaces still-unresolved critical issues. Use when user says "kill argument", "adversarial review", "hostile review", "rebuttal preparation", "reviewer-2 simulation", or before submitting a theory paper that has already passed standard review rounds.
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。
Analyzes code diffs and files to identify bugs, security vulnerabilities (SQL injection, XSS, insecure deserialization), code smells, N+1 queries, naming issues, and architectural concerns, then produces a structured review report with prioritized, actionable feedback. Use when reviewing pull requests, conducting code quality audits, identifying refactoring opportunities, or checking for security issues. Invoke for PR reviews, code quality checks, refactoring suggestions, review code, code quality. Complements specialized skills (security-reviewer, test-master) by providing broad-scope review across correctness, performance, maintainability, and test coverage in a single pass.
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 file-focused code review for correctness bugs. Unlike shallow-review which runs 6 specialists in parallel across the entire patch, deep-review focuses on user-specified files with full pattern catalogs (500+ patterns), codebase investigation, and source-level context gathering. Use when: the user specifies particular files for focused review, a shallow review flagged areas that need deeper investigation, reviewing critical-path code changes, examining complex serialization/lifecycle/state-machine changes. The user instructs which files to focus on (typically a subset of files in the patch).
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。
Runs an autonomous review-and-fix improvement loop over a Claude Code skill until a review comes back clean, with a cross-round findings ledger, escalation when fixes stop converging, and a mechanical scope guard. Reviews are performed by the plugin-dev skill-reviewer agent. Use to fix skill quality issues, iteratively refine a skill, or resume a loop after an escalation ('fix my skill', 'improve this skill until it passes review', 'skill improvement loop'). NOT for a one-time review — use the plugin-dev skill-reviewer agent directly.
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 for `/loopx-pr-review` or evidence-backed PR queue review. Run `loopx pr-review` first, execute the capability-owned review plan for each selected exact head, then publish full bilingual PR reviews (complete Chinese five-block review plus one concise English verdict) that match the verified findings. Use `loopx-pr-merge` for approval or merge actions.
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 code changes and provides actionable feedback. Use when the user asks to review a PR, diff, commit, or code changes. Triggers on "/review", "review this PR", "review my changes", "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。
Help users create and manage mirrord preview environments — running a modified service as an isolated pod in a shared Kubernetes cluster, scoped by an environment key and HTTP/queue traffic filtering, so teams can validate and review changes against real traffic without affecting live services. Use when a developer wants to run "mirrord preview" ad hoc, share a preview via a link (mirrord-share-ingress), or wire preview environments into CI with the metalbear-co/mirrord-preview GitHub Action (e.g. per-PR previews, least-privilege cluster access).
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-first audit for Chinese and English academic papers across LaTeX, Typst, and PDF formats. Use whenever the user wants reviewer-style paper critique, pre-submission readiness checks, pass/fail gate decisions, structured revision roadmaps, or re-audits of revised manuscripts. Trigger even if the user only says "review my paper", "check if this is ready to submit", "audit this PDF", "simulate peer review", "find the biggest problems in this manuscript", or "re-check whether I fixed the review issues". Do not use for direct source editing or compilation-heavy repair; route those to the format-specific writing skills instead.
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 comprehensive literature reviews for medical imaging AI research. Use when writing survey papers, systematic reviews, or literature analyses on topics like segmentation, detection, classification in CT, MRI, X-ray, ultrasound, or pathology imaging. Triggers on requests for "review paper", "survey", "literature review", "综述", "systematic review", or mentions of writing academic reviews on deep learning for medical imaging.
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。
Universal deep research agent team. 13-agent pipeline for rigorous academic research on any topic. 7 modes: full research, quick brief, paper review, lit-review, fact-check, Socratic guided research dialogue, and systematic review with optional meta-analysis. Covers research question formulation, Socratic mentoring, methodology design, systematic literature search, source verification, cross-source synthesis, risk of bias assessment, meta-analysis, APA 7.0 report compilation, editorial review, devil's advocate challenges, ethics review, and post-research literature monitoring. Triggers on: research, deep research, literature review, systematic review, meta-analysis, PRISMA, evidence synthesis, fact-check, guide my research, help me think through, 研究, 深度研究, 文獻回顧, 文獻探討, 系統性回顧, 後設分析, 事實查核, 引導我的研究, 幫我釐清, 幫我想想, 我不確定要研究什麼, 研究方向, 研究主題.
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 of a PR, branch, or your own uncommitted work across eight dimensions — security, correctness, test coverage, API/compatibility, usability, documentation, code quality, performance. Sizes the diff, reviews inline or fans out reviewers off a shared brief, verifies findings against code, reports a grouped list with a shape verdict, fixes on approval. Use for "review this PR", "/pr-review 3011", or a pre-flight self-review before submitting; add "thorough" for adversarial 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。
Parallel read-only multi-agent review of a current git diff or explicit file scope to find behavioral regressions, security or privacy risks, performance or reliability issues, and contract or test coverage gaps. Use when the user asks for a review swarm, parallel review, diff review, regression review, security review, or wants high-signal issues plus a prioritized fix path without editing files.
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。
Monitor dividend portfolios with Kanchi-style forced-review triggers (T1-T5) and convert anomalies into OK/WARN/REVIEW states without auto-selling. Use when users ask for 減配検知, 8-Kガバナンス監視, 配当安全性モニタリング, REVIEWキュー自動化, or periodic dividend risk checks.
When the user wants to analyze, respond to, or improve their app reviews and ratings. Also use when the user mentions "reviews", "ratings", "negative reviews", "how to get more reviews", "review response", or "my rating is dropping". For broader ASO audit, see aso-audit. For retention issues causing bad reviews, see retention-optimization.
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。