934 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Hands-off, diff-scoped browser QA of the active branch: maps user flows, drives a real browser, autonomously fixes small breakages with regression tests and commits, judges experience against product personas, and writes a durable dogfood report. Manual invocation only.
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。
Document a solved problem as a durable repo learning. Use when verified work produced non-obvious reasoning absent from its final code, tests, or existing docs; avoid routine fixes whose artifacts already explain the lesson.
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。
Sweep configured feedback sources (Slack, GitHub Issues; email experimental) for new items: acknowledge at source, analyze recordings, verify fixes merged to main, and emit an `lfg`-ready plan. First run sets up sources; supports mode:non-interactive for scheduled runs.
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。
test on Windows, enterprise CA, corporate certificate, GPO cert, TLS fetch failed, Windows sandbox, daytona windows, self-hosted cert. Use when validating OpenWork Windows enterprise TLS/OS-trust fixes in a Daytona Windows sandbox.
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 rule adherence checker. Scans the codebase for rule violations, fixes the highest-impact ones in an isolated worktree, runs full validation, creates a PR. Uses memory to track progress across runs.
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。
Interpret validation errors and guide fixing them. Use when encountering validation errors, validation warnings, false positives, operator structure issues, or need help understanding validation results. Also use when asking about validation profiles, error types, the validation loop process, or auto-fix capabilities. Consult this skill whenever a validate_node or validate_workflow call returns errors or warnings — it knows which warnings are false positives and which errors need real 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。
Whole-repo audit for over-engineering. Like ponytail-review, but scans the entire codebase instead of a diff: a ranked list of what to delete, simplify, or replace with stdlib/native equivalents. Use when the user says "audit this codebase", "audit for over-engineering", "what can I delete from this repo", "find bloat", "ponytail-audit", or "/ponytail-audit". One-shot report, does not apply 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。
How to roll Kortix PRODUCTION back to an older already-released version — the inverse of a release. Covers the one-dispatch rollback-prod.yml engine, the per-surface mechanics (API + gateway = ECS Fargate image-tag swap; frontend = Vercel promote), the all-important Vercel frontend behavior (why a backend-only push can 'clobber' a FE rollback, and the 'don't rebuild the FE for backend-only pushes' skip that fixes it), the DB/migration-drift safety check that is the real blocker, and how a later promote returns prod to latest. Load WHENEVER the user wants to roll back / revert / downgrade / 'go back a version' on prod, asks how the rollback or the frontend clobber/skip behavior works, or needs to run rollback-prod.yml. Pairs with kortix-release (the forward direction).
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。
Rigorous mathematical proof verification and fixing workflow. Reads a LaTeX proof, identifies gaps via fresh-agent Codex GPT-6-Astra ultra review, fixes each gap with full derivations, re-reviews, and generates an audit report. Base review is same-family provisional. Use when user says "检查证明", "verify proof", "proof check", "审证明", "check this proof", or wants rigorous mathematical verification of a theory paper.
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。
Autonomously improve a generated paper via Gemini review through gemini-review MCP → implement fixes → recompile, for 2 rounds. Use when user says "改论文", "improve paper", "论文润色循环", "auto improve", or wants to iteratively polish a generated paper.
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。
Autonomous multi-round research review loop. Repeatedly reviews using a secondary Codex agent, 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。
Autonomously improve a generated paper via Claude review through claude-review MCP → implement fixes → recompile, for 2 rounds. Use when user says "改论文", "improve paper", "论文润色循环", "auto improve", or wants to iteratively polish a generated paper.
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。
Rigorous mathematical proof verification and fixing workflow. Reads a LaTeX proof, identifies gaps via cross-model review (external reviewer backend, ultra reasoning), fixes each gap with full derivations, re-reviews, and generates an audit report. Use when user says "检查证明", "verify proof", "proof check", "审证明", "check this proof", or wants rigorous mathematical verification of a theory paper.
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。
Autonomously improve a generated paper via GPT-6-Astra xhigh review → implement fixes → recompile, for 2 rounds. Use when user says "改论文", "improve paper", "论文润色循环", "auto improve", or wants to iteratively polish a generated paper.
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. In Copilot CLI it defaults to the native complementary rubber-duck subagent with host-event model evidence; elsewhere it uses Codex, while explicit external reviewer overrides remain available. Implements fixes and re-reviews until a policy-approved positive assessment or max rounds is reached.
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。
Survey a codebase's animation and motion code as a senior motion advisor, then produce a prioritized audit and self-contained implementation plans for other agents (or cheaper models) to execute. Read-only on source code — it plans improvements, it does not apply them. Use when the user asks to "improve the animations", "audit the motion", "make this app feel better", or wants a roadmap of animation fixes rather than a review of a single 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。
Produce the smallest possible code change that fixes a specific, well-scoped issue (CI failure, reviewer comment, typo). Use only when the fix target is explicit. Never refactor unrelated code.
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。
Install Loop Engineering into a project via the unified CLI front door (@cobusgreyling/loop). Prefer this over invoking loop-init / loop-audit separately. Week-one is report-only; never enable auto-merge or unattended fixes unless the human explicitly asks and doctor is healthy.
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。
Track validated Codex Security findings in Linear, Jira, GitHub issues, or draft GitHub security advisories. Supports issue batches, duplicate checks, and reviewed writes. Do not use for scans or 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。
Use only when the user explicitly asks to fix and verify a validated or plausible security vulnerability. Do not use for ordinary bug fixes, correctness or design review findings, general validation, or full PR, commit, branch, patch, or repository scans.
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。
Triage supplied or imported security findings against a repository using its security policy and static code evidence. Accepts scanner reports, advisories, GitHub findings, and Jira or Linear tickets. Do not use for discovery, duplicate triage, runtime validation, or 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。
Select the Resolve mode, recover its input, check the workspace, and discover existing 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。