1.7万 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Automated code review for pull requests using specialized review patterns. Analyzes code for quality, security, performance, and best practices. Use when reviewing code changes, PRs, or doing code audits.
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。
> Persistent belief revision log wiring in-memory AGM BeliefSet to DuckDB time-travel storage. Triggers: belief revision, AGM postulates, time-travel query, belief history, AS-OF queries on propositions, persistent belief state, append-only belief log. >>>>>>> origin/main
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 whole deliverable (talk, course module, paper, chapter, or referee report) against its manifest without rewriting it. Runs a deterministic gate for build, citations, numbers, facts, and leaks and stops on failure, then runs a finder over each section and a strong-model pass over the whole work, and adjudicates into checks/<date>/findings.json and report.md with anchored findings, severities, and honest NOT CHECKED coverage within a dollar budget. Use when asked to lint or review the whole talk, module, or paper, for a pre-ship review, or for the night shift. Revision stays serial and author-led.
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 implementing a Python feature, adding CLI commands, writing pytest suites, reviewing Python code, debugging, or refactoring. The primary Python engineering workflow orchestrator — classifies the task and delegates through this plugin's own specialist agents (architect → implement → test → review), sized to the task. Delegates to python-cli-architect (implementation), python-pytest-architect (tests), code-reviewer (review), python-cli-design-spec (architecture). Triggers on any Python task requiring specialist agent coordination or multi-agent execution.
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 pytest test effectiveness against authoritative contracts, relevant faults, behavior-preserving refactors, realistic boundaries, isolation, and diagnostics. Use for test-quality audits, coverage-gap reviews, regression-test changes, or mocking reviews; preserve existing project gates rather than inventing coverage targets.
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 Python code across type safety, error handling, security, performance, modern patterns, design clarity, typed-boundary compliance, test quality, and documentation. Use when performing code review, PR review, pre-merge quality checks, or assessing Python for security vulnerabilities, bare except clauses, Any usage outside boundaries, or missing input validation at system boundaries.
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。
Load the shared verdict, punch-list, SKIP, and gate schema used by the dh multi-perspective review orchestrator, reviewers, and synthesizer. Use only when one of those components must produce, parse, validate, or gate review results.
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。
Provides TypeScript-specific code review patterns covering strict mode, ESM, type safety, branded types, discriminated unions, async patterns, runtime safety, and common anti-patterns. Activates on detection of tsconfig.json, *.ts, or *.tsx files during code review — loaded automatically by dh:code-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。
Drafts a referee report for a journal editor. Produces a recommendation, claim-and-design summary, three to six decision-driving concerns, additional concerns, and a revision plan through five parallel adversarial finders, Breaker, Butcher, Shredder, Void, Situator, a Blue Team error filter, Chief Reviewer synthesis, Tone Guard legal pass, and optional confidential editor note. Use when the user has been asked to referee a manuscript. Self-audits go to paper-review-lite or presubmit, and author responses go to referee-response.
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。
Builds or audits a literature review, producing an evidence map, the closest prior work, source clusters, a gap verdict, and a synthesis plan for the introduction. Use when the user asks whether a contribution is novel, who has studied a question, what the literature establishes, or how to organize a review, or wants a reading list, Zotero export, or pile of papers turned into one. For systematic reviews or meta-analyses it produces the protocol scaffold and routes registration (PROSPERO or OSF) and screening to dedicated tools.
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。
Builds or audits a literature review: evidence map, closest prior work, gap verdict, and synthesis plan. Use to check whether a contribution is novel, map what a literature establishes, or organize a review; systematic reviews get a protocol scaffold.
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 documentation for quality, clarity, SEO, and technical correctness. Optimized for Docus/Nuxt Content but works with any Markdown documentation. Use when asked to: "review docs", "check documentation", "audit docs", "validate documentation", "improve docs quality", "analyze documentation", "check my docs", "review my documentation pages", "validate MDC syntax", "check for SEO issues", "analyze doc structure". Provides actionable recommendations categorized by priority (Critical, Important, Nice-to-have).
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。
Delegates coding tasks to Codex CLI for prototyping, debugging, and code review. Use when: (1) Backend/logic implementation, (2) Algorithm design and optimization, (3) Bug analysis and debugging, (4) API/database code generation, (5) Code quality review and refactoring. Triggers: "implement algorithm", "debug", "analyze code", "backend task", "API implementation", "optimize performance", "refactor", "generate prototype", "code review". IMPORTANT: Default sandbox="read-only" (analysis/review/patch generation); use sandbox="workspace-write" only when codex must run tests/builds to verify. Always request unified diff patches only. Supports multi-turn sessions via SESSION_ID.
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。
Earnings analysis — pre- and post-earnings. Pre-earnings preview: prior-guidance review, recent-events tracking, last call's Q&A, and a key-things-to-watch framework for an upcoming release. Post-earnings: two tiers — a fast in-chat summary card (default) and a full Markdown research report (on request). Covers beat/miss, segments, margins, guidance, estimates, valuation. US / HK / A-share. Use whenever the user wants an earnings preview or a post-earnings / quarterly-results writeup. Triggers: "earnings update", "quarterly results", "Q1/Q2/Q3/Q4 results", "earnings report", "post-earnings analysis", "beat/miss", "guidance update", "earnings preview", "pre-earnings", "what to watch this earnings", "before earnings", "财报分析", "业绩更新", "季度业绩", "季报", "年报", "盈利分析", "财报点评", "财报前瞻", "业绩前瞻", "财报预览", "上季度指引", "財報分析", "業績更新", "季度業績", "季報", "年報", "財報點評", "財報前瞻", "業績前瞻", "財報預覽".
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 touched Rust files for prose-comment quality, rustdoc accuracy, and manually chopped comment wrapping. Use when a broad review needs a dedicated Rust prose/rustdoc pass or when the user asks for comment-quality review specifically.
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 touched code for maintainability smells such as duplication, awkward indirection, suspicious clones, dead code, poor naming, and Boy Scout cleanup opportunities. Use when a broad review needs a dedicated maintainability pass or when the user asks for code-smell review specifically.
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 Incan RFC document for formatting, structural, and content issues before GitHub submission. Use when the user asks to review an RFC, check an RFC for problems, prepare an RFC for submission, or says /review-rfc.
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 touched subsystems for layering, crate boundaries, single-source-of-truth rules, registry-driven behavior, and compiler/runtime separation. Use when a broad review needs a dedicated architecture pass or when the user asks for architectural review specifically.
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 user-facing docs, CLI reference text, examples, and scaffolds for truthfulness, prose quality, and RFC leakage. Use when a broad review needs a dedicated docs/claims pass or when the user asks for docs-truth review specifically.
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 touched tests and test-adjacent code for style, Result-returning patterns, panic helpers, unwrap/expect use, and obvious coverage gaps. Use when a broad review needs a dedicated test pass or when the user asks for test-review specifically.
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。
Discover, wait for, sign in, create specific user data, and assert a PR preview deploy. Use on medium or high risk PRs, after pushing a ready-for-review PR, or when the user asks to test the preview 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。
Use before opening a PR, or whenever asked to self-review a diffusers contribution. Applies the same rubric as the `@claude` CI (checks the diff against references/review-rules.md, traces call paths for dead code). Reports findings grouped by severity, flagging what to fix before submitting (blocking issues + dead code) vs what to leave for the actual review. Report-only — does not edit 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。
Perform a holistic, human-reviewer-style critique of the currently staged Git changes (or, with `--unstaged`, of the unstaged and untracked changes, with `--branch`, of a branch against its base, or, with `--commit`, of a single commit) and emit an approve/reject verdict with prioritized, severity-tagged, line-cited findings. Use when the user wants the staged diff, a branch, or a commit "reviewed", "critiqued", or "code-reviewed".
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。
Builds, revises, restyles, and critiques deliberate, editable Feishu / Lark whiteboards from content, references, existing SVGs, or live boards. Use for whiteboards, infographics, diagrams, system maps, timelines, decision boards, posters, and visual explainers that need factual fidelity, strong hierarchy, intentional composition, and evidence-based review rather than a generic grid of equal cards. Routes creation, revision, and critique through separate playbooks; commits to a content-and-design contract before drawing; validates deterministic SVG defects; renders and inspects the actual artifact; and uses an independent final reviewer for material deliveries.
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。