1.3万 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Runs performance systems that change behavior — expectations, feedback, review cycles, calibration, and handling underperformance. Use this to design or fix a review process, run calibration, write or coach on feedback, address sustained underperformance, or work out why reviews consume weeks and change nothing.
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 and negotiates commercial agreements — MSAs, SOWs, order forms, NDAs, vendor and data-processing agreements — identifying material risk, proposing positions, and recommending a path rather than listing issues. Use this to review a contract before signature, prepare a negotiation position, build fallback positions and approval thresholds, or assess exposure in terms already agreed.
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。
Keep a reviewable decision trail for long-running or unattended work: a TSV log with one row per decision (what, why, evidence, result). Local by default; commit it when a reviewer needs the trail to trust the result. Use for /show-me-your-work, autonomous or multi-phase runs, or work a human reviews after stepping away.
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 "interrogate", "adversarial review", "multi-model review", "challenge this", "stress test this code", "find blind spots", or "tear this apart". Multiple LLM reviewers challenge changes from independent angles.
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 changes for correctness, security, and maintainability. Supports local git diffs (staged or working tree) and remote Pull Requests (by ID or URL). Use when the user asks to review code, check a PR, audit changes, or wants feedback on code quality before merging.
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。
Orchestrates a systematic review and meta-analysis workflow following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, from protocol development through multi-database search, screening, data extraction, and evidence synthesis. Use when conducting evidence-based reviews, meta-analyses, or scoping revi...
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。
Helps organize reviewer comments and generate a standardized Word (.docx) response letter that maps each change to its exact location (page/paragraph/line). Use when revising a manuscript, replying to peer-review feedback, or preparing internal review responses.
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。
Generates academic reviews for molecules in diseases using PubMed research. Invoke when user needs biomedical literature review with Vancouver citation format.
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 professional peer reviews for papers or theses, providing structured evaluations and improvement suggestions; use when you need a pre-submission assessment, an internal review, or academic quality control.
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。
Simulate structured grant peer review for biomedical proposals; use when stress-testing significance, innovation, approach, feasibility, and reviewer-facing weaknesses before submission.
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 f...
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。
A multi-stage workflow for writing long-form medical reviews; used when the user needs to build an outline based on PubMed literature, write chapter by chapter, perform supplementary searches, and format citations; input is the review topic and project directory, output is a c...
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。
Address actionable GitHub pull request review comments for xquic. Use when asked to handle PR review feedback, requested changes, unresolved inline threads, or reviewer comments while preserving unrelated edits.
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。
Fail closed on published draft XQUIC code pull requests before ready-for-review state. Use when asked to pre-review a code PR or move it out of draft; verify current base-to-head code, protocol conformance, validation coverage, adversarial bad cases, hot-path performance, and memory safety in a five-part local report.
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 UI code for Web Interface Guidelines compliance. Use when asked to "review my UI", "check accessibility", "audit design", "review UX", or "check my site against best practices".
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。
Findings-first code review workflow for AI coding agents. Use when the user asks to review uncommitted changes, commits in a date range, or a branch compared to the main branch / PR-style diff. Focuses on bugs, regressions, correctness risks, missing tests, security/data-safety issues, and other behavior-changing defects.
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。
Methodology for clause-by-clause review of a contract against a structured deviation policy ("playbook"). Covers how to walk a playbook, locate the matching provision in the contract, apply rule types (max-value, must-be-present, must-be-absent, acceptable-set, must-have-feature), classify the result (ok / risk / reject), choose the prescribed action, and ground each finding in a verbatim excerpt. Use whenever reviewing any contract — NDA, MSA, vendor DD questionnaire, lease, DPA — against a structured rules-based playbook.
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 plan review by 3 independent reviewers (Feasibility, Completeness, Scope & Alignment) before presenting to user.
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。
Fresh adversarial code review with binary PASS/FAIL verdicts, evidence citations, and anchoring bias prevention via fresh reviewer spawning.
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。
Coordinate specialized code, security, architecture, and performance reviewers and consolidate their results. Use when a codebase needs parallel review across multiple disciplines.
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。
Coordinate code quality, architecture, security, performance, testing, and documentation reviews. Use when a change or codebase needs a consolidated assessment across these areas.
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。
Elite code review expert specializing in modern AI-powered code analysis, security vulnerabilities, performance optimization, and production reliability. Masters static analysis tools, security scanning, and configuration review with 2024/2025 best practices. Use PROACTIVELY for code quality assurance.
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 existing GitHub pull request and post inline review comments on its diff. Use when the changes are on an opened PR rather than your local working tree.
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。
Run Chain-of-Verification (CoVe) on a draft or a block of text with factual claims. Spawns the `claim-verifier` agent in a fresh context (never a conversation fork) so it never sees the draft — then reports which claims are supported, contradicted, or unverifiable. Use when user says "verify these citations", "check the claims in X", "did I hallucinate anything", "fact-check this draft", "run CoVe on this", or after any text generation that asserts facts about papers, datasets, or numerical results. NOT for style/grammar review (use `/proofread`) or substance review (use `/review-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。