「review」の検索結果

Drafts a DRAFT self-assessment, peer feedback note or manager review narrative from the evidence the writer supplies (goals, examples, metrics, notes), in the review template where given: every sentence tied to a numbered evidence item, unsupported claims removed and logged, and a gaps list to complete before submitting. Never assigns, suggests or implies a rating, score, ranking, pay or promotion outcome. Use when the user asks to "write my self-assessment", "draft peer feedback for a colleague", "turn these notes into a performance review", "help me write the year-end review for my report", "summarise my achievements against my goals" or "draft the mid-year review". Do not use for a job description or role profile, use job-description-drafter instead; for a new hire's first 90 days, use onboarding-plan-builder. 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 Works Council Representative archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage, employee-impact risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "review this as the works council would", "what would the works council say about this rollout", "prepare me for the staff council consultation", "find the employee-impact gaps in this plan" or "pressure-test this deck from the employee representative side". Do not use for people strategy, restructuring or HR policy, use chro-reviewer instead; for whether frontline staff will adopt or work around the change, use frontline-skeptic-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 Information Security Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review with a verdict, findings cited to specific passages, security and compliance risks and the five interrogation questions a real CISO would ask. Use when the user asks to "run a CISO review", "pressure-test the security of this plan", "what would our CISO say about this" or "check the privacy and third-party risk". Do not use for contract, liability or regulatory-interpretation reviews, use general-counsel-reviewer instead. 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 Data Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage, data and AI governance risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CDO review", "pressure-test the data governance in this plan", "what would a CDO say about this", "check the metric definitions and data sources" or "prepare this for the data governance board". Do not use for security controls or third-party security risk, use ciso-reviewer instead; for contract, liability or regulatory terms, use general-counsel-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 Operating Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings cited to specific sections, delivery and operational risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a COO review", "pressure-test the delivery plan", "what would our COO say about this", "check the timeline and capacity" or "find the execution gaps before the steering committee". Do not use for financial questions, use cfo-reviewer instead; for architecture or vendor questions, use cto-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 Business Officer archetype, covering commercial model, partnerships, deal structure, market positioning, strategic fit and opportunity cost, and returns a DRAFT review with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage, commercial risks and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CBO review", "pressure-test this partnership", "check the deal structure" or "what would a commercial executive say about this". Do not use for pipeline, quota, sales-motion or forecast reviews, use cro-reviewer instead. 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 Marketing Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings cited to specific passages, marketing risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CMO review", "pressure-test the positioning", "what would a CMO say about this", "challenge the launch plan" or "check the messaging and audience". Do not use for price economics, margins or payback, use cfo-reviewer instead; for sales pipeline mechanics, use cro-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。

PR確認・PRレビューの依頼で、PRまたはremote branchの差分を取得しshared reviewerへ渡す。PR番号・URL・branchを扱い、ローカルの未コミット差分・ファイル指定はreviewerを使う。ユーザーが `/review-pr` と入力したら必ず使う。

複数の AI / 人間レビュー結果 (review-self / review-external / findings-pool) を統合し、実在性・重大度・対応優先度・merge 可否を検証する。

Marp形式プレゼンテーションの専門レビュー・評価・改善スキル。 10軸スコアリング（100点満点）で品質を定量評価し、具体的な改善コード付きで提案する。 Use when the user asks to: - Review, evaluate, or critique a Marp presentation / プレゼンをレビュー / 評価 / 添削 - Improve, polish, or upgrade existing slides / スライドを改善 / ブラッシュアップ - Check slide quality, score slides, or audit a deck / スライドの品質チェック / 採点 - "このプレゼンどう？" "スライドを見てほしい" "プレゼン資料のフィードバック" Reads .md files with Marp frontmatter, scores across 10 dimensions, and outputs a detailed review report with concrete before/after code improvements. Works as a companion to the marp-slides skill (generation → review → improvement cycle).

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。

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。

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。

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。

Fetch unread GitHub notifications for open PRs where review is requested from a specified team or opened by a team member. Use when asked to "find PRs I need to review", "show my review requests", "what needs my review", "fetch GitHub review requests", or "check team review queue".

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 PR code review for OneKey monorepo. Use when reviewing PRs, code changes, or diffs — covers security (secrets/PII leakage, supply-chain, AuthN/AuthZ), code quality (hooks, race conditions, null safety, concurrent requests), and OneKey-specific patterns (Fabric crashes, MIUI, BigNumber). Triggers on "review PR", "review this PR", "code review", "check this diff", "审查 PR", "代码审查", "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。

PR レビュー。PR 番号・URL・ブランチ名・Slack リンク等を添えて PR の「レビュー」を依頼された時に使用（ビルトインの /review ではなく本スキル）。Claude Code と外部 CLI のマルチモデルレビューで Critical/High/Medium の指摘を報告する。境界: ローカル未コミット変更は /code-review、自ブランチの提出前チェックは self-review、特定コメントへの対応は pr-comment。PR の状態確認・作成相談では使わない。

コードベース全体のレビュー・監査。perf/sec/test/arch/cq/docs の6観点を並列委譲し、優先度付き issue ファイルと観点サマリをメモリディレクトリに生成する。コードベース全体の監査・定期レビュー・リリース前品質確認の依頼時、/codebase-review 実行時に使用。境界: PR 単位は pr-review、自ブランチの提出前確認は self-review。

/review-fix をループ実行し、CONVERGED になるまで自動修正を繰り返す。スコープ引数は /review-all と同じ（wt / PR #N / pr:N / vs:<branch> / git range / ファイル列挙、デフォルトは比較ブランチとの差分）。最大イテレーション数を数値で指定可能。Use when user says 'レビュー収束まで繰り返して', 'review-fix-loop', '自動修正ループ', or '収束するまでレビュー'.

code-review-scanner と code-review-critic による2フェーズレビュー。 大きなPRや複雑な変更を丁寧にレビューしたいときに使う。 scanner がトリアージして重要な指摘だけ critic が深掘りする。 軽いチェックには /review（4並列専門レビュー）を使う。

Claude Code と Codex CLI による並列コードレビュー。親で差分・コンテキストを 1 回だけ収集し、Claude Code（全観点を一括レビュー）と Codex（`/codex-review` 経由）を並列実行、結果を統合した review.md / review.html を生成する。

cc-sdd実装用統合ブランチのコミット群（ベースブランチとの差分）をreview slice単位のstacked PRに再構成する際に使用。「review sliceに分割」「stacked PRを作成」「PRをスタックして」「レビュー用にPRを分けて」「review slice stack」という依頼でトリガーする。dry-run（既定）でslice計画を提示し、apply指示で実際にブランチ・PRを作成する。

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。

Eng manager-mode plan review. Lock in the execution plan — architecture, data flow, diagrams, edge cases, test coverage, performance. Walks through issues interactively with opinionated recommendations. Use when asked to "review the architecture", "engineering review", or "lock in the plan". Proactively suggest when the user has a plan or design doc and is about to start coding — to catch architecture issues before implementation. (gstack) Voice triggers (speech-to-text aliases): "tech review", "technical review", "plan engineering 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。