「independent review」の検索結果

Multi-perspective academic paper review with dynamic reviewer personas. Runs a 5-seat, role-separated review panel (Journal-Fit Reviewer + 3 peer-review roles + Devil's Advocate) with field-specific expertise; role separation is not a claim of independent error processes. Supports full review, re-review (verification), quick assessment, methodology focus, Socratic guided, and calibration modes. Triggers on: review paper, peer review, manuscript review, referee report, review my paper, critique paper, simulate review, editorial review, calibrate reviewer, reviewer calibration, measure reviewer accuracy, 審查論文, 論文審查, 模擬審查, 同儕審查, 幫我審這篇, 以審查人角度評估, 審查者校準, 논문 심사, 동료 심사, 모의 심사, 심사자 관점에서 평가, 심사자 보정, revisar artículo, revisión entre pares, revisión de manuscrito, informe de árbitro, revisa mi artículo, criticar artículo, simular revisión, revisión editorial, calibrar revisor.

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。

Multi-perspective academic paper review with dynamic reviewer personas. Runs a 5-seat, role-separated review panel (Journal-Fit Reviewer + 3 peer-review roles + Devil's Advocate) with field-specific expertise; role separation is not a claim of independent error processes. Supports full review, re-review (verification), quick assessment, methodology focus, Socratic guided, and calibration modes. Triggers on: review paper, peer review, manuscript review, referee report, review my paper, critique paper, simulate review, editorial review, calibrate reviewer, reviewer calibration, measure reviewer accuracy, 審查論文, 論文審查, 模擬審查, 同儕審查, 幫我審這篇, 以審查人角度評估, 審查者校準, 논문 심사, 동료 심사, 모의 심사, 심사자 관점에서 평가, 심사자 보정.

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。

Multi-perspective academic paper review with dynamic reviewer personas. Simulates 5 independent reviewers (EIC + 3 peer reviewers + Devil's Advocate) with field-specific expertise. Supports full review, re-review (verification), quick assessment, methodology focus, Socratic guided, and calibration modes. Triggers on: review paper, peer review, manuscript review, referee report, review my paper, critique paper, simulate review, editorial review, calibrate reviewer, reviewer calibration, measure reviewer accuracy.

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。

Multi-perspective academic paper review with dynamic reviewer personas. Simulates 5 independent reviewers (EIC + 3 peer reviewers + Devil's Advocate) with field-specific expertise. Supports full review, re-review (verification), quick assessment, methodology focus, and Socratic guided modes. Triggers on: review paper, peer review, manuscript review, referee report, review my paper, critique paper, simulate review, editorial 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。

Independent review loop run before delivery in code work. An independent reviewer (Codex, or fresh Codex-style subagents) reads the whole PR against the approved outcome; the lead fixes in-scope functional findings and re-reviews until none remain. Its differentiator is independence and exhaustiveness — a reviewer that fails differently from the authors, run to clean — distinct from the recursive-refinement ladder. Invoked by the team lead from the unified pre-ship gate (code-mode and /swarm:refine) after the ship steps.

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。

Multi-agent code review using the Pragmatic Quality framework. Orchestrates parallel review agents (CLAUDE.md compliance, bug scanning, git history, security) with independent confidence scoring to produce high-signal findings. Use when user runs /code-review, /review:code-review, requests a "code review", "review my changes", "PR review", or mentions "review diff", "review branch".

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 an adversarial two-phase code review of a change with TWO independent reviewers — Claude and Codex — who review alone, then cross-examine each other's findings, then Claude synthesizes a single weighted verdict. Use when the user says "/adversarial-review", "adversarial review", "review this with Codex", "get Codex to review", "two-reviewer review", "cross-examine this PR", or wants a second independent model to grade a change before merge.

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。

指定したコミットやブランチなどを基準にコードの変更を確認し、開発規約への適合と仕様の実現を別々にレビューします。二つの観点の指摘を分けて報告するスキルです。

• ブランチやPRの変更レビュー
• 指定コミットやタグ以降の確認
• 文書化された開発規約との照合

公開前の文章やコードを二つの独立したエージェントが同じ基準で審査し、両方の合格まで修正と再審査を繰り返し、上限を超えたら人へ判断を引き継ぐスキル。

• 公開前に文章の事実関係を確認したいとき
• 顧客向け文章とブランドルールの照合
• 本番配布前に独立した審査を加えたいとき

Run an independent code review using the OpenAI Codex CLI in headless mode. Gets a second opinion from a different model family (the current Codex models) on recent changes, a PR, a commit, or the whole app — covering bugs, regressions, security, data consistency, UX/state bugs, performance risks, and testing gaps. Saves a severity-prioritised report to .jez/reviews/. Triggers: 'codex review', 'review with codex', 'independent code review', 'what does codex think', 'get codex to 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。

Run an independent peer review via Claude. Use when the user asks to "peer review", "peer review my code", "peer review my plan", "get a second opinion", or "independent 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。

Run an independent peer review via Codex. Use when the user asks to "peer review", "peer review my code", "peer review my plan", "get a second opinion", or "independent 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。

Perform a rigorous Carmack Council code review. Use when explicitly asked to review code, do a "council review", "carmack review", or invoke /council-review. Carmack's philosophy chairs a council of domain experts — Troy Hunt (security), Martin Fowler (refactoring), Kent C. Dodds (frontend), Matteo Collina (Node.js), Brandur Leach (Postgres), Vercel Performance, Simon Willison (LLM pipelines), Karri Saarinen (UI quality), Vitaly Friedman (UX quality), Kent Beck (test quality). Uses parallel subagents for deep, independent review. Produces prioritised P1/P2/P3 findings. Stack: Next.js App Router / React / TypeScript / tRPC / Prisma / Neon / Clerk.

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。

Dispatch reviews to external companion AIs (Codex, Gemini, Claude) for an independent second opinion on code changes, PR readiness, doc completeness, architecture, or implementation status. Use when you want a fresh-eyes review beyond Claude-native. Trigger on "get a second opinion", "companion review", "review my changes", "review the PR". For Claude-only quality checks use /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。

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。

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。

Reviews PRs against the live base with immutable objects and three-way merges. Use for PR review/merge readiness, main changed, closed-PR reconsideration, open-PR sweeps, review-led repair, or explicitly requested independent review of your own contribution. Not for GitHub CRUD (use github-ops), authoring/maintaining your PR (use github-contributor), or merging without fresh 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。

Deep behavioral audit of a Lattice skill — proposes 3 review personas relevant to the skill, runs independent scenario analysis from each persona's perspective, then merges only the high-confidence, practical findings into a severity-ordered gap report with proposed fixes. Structural validation (conventions, cross-references) is skill-validate's job — this skill finds gaps that would realistically surface when someone actually uses the skill: missing scenario handling, ambiguous instructions, silent failure cases, and behavioral inconsistencies. Filters out theoretical edge cases, low-likelihood speculation, and findings owned by other skills. Use after writing or significantly changing any skill, or when the user says 'review this skill', 'deep review', 'does this skill work', 'find gaps in this skill', 'stress test this skill', 'review from different angles', or 'skill review'. Standalone — does not call other skills.

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 the Codex Optimized Development, Evaluation, and Remediation (CODER) Loop with an orchestration-only coordinator, non-overlapping task-family owners, fresh independent reviewers, evidence-scoped remediation, and final coordinator acceptance. Discover and compose optional MSW, Timebox, MSL, and Codex Voice Optimizer companions as the Slopware Dev Stack without making them dependencies. Use in Codex when the user invokes the CODER Loop, asks to divide a complex change into bounded implementation families with independent reviewers, requests multi-agent implementation without overlapping ownership, requires review and repair until every blocking gap is independently rechecked, asks for the CODER tutorial or Slopware Dev Stack, or wants CODER to install or use its companions. Do not trigger for an ordinary single-agent change, a review-only request, or a non-Codex host.

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 the user asks for a code review by a fleet of specialized reviewer agents, wants multiple independent reviewer perspectives, or asks to run reviewers in single-pass or iterative fix-until-clean mode. Launches focused subagents for correctness, security, architecture, conventions, simplicity, UX, reliability, telemetry, testing, compatibility, and documentation 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。

Get a second opinion or independent review from Codex (OpenAI) via the local Codex CLI. Use when the user wants Codex to review a design memo, PR, diff, or decision, or to cross-check an approach from another model. Also trigger on "Codexに聞いて", "Codexと相談", "Codexにレビュー", "Codexの意見", "別のモデルで確認".

実装計画をタスクごとに別のエージェントへ任せ、仕様への適合とコード品質を確認しながら進めるスキル。進捗をファイルに記録し、最後に変更全体もレビューします。

• 独立したタスクの実装計画を進めたいとき
• タスクごとに仕様への適合を確認したいとき
• 進捗記録から作業を再開したいとき

Review code changes with several independent reviewers in parallel, then triage and present the findings. Use when the user says "run code review" or "review this 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。

Gets independent code reviews from Codex or Antigravity for uncommitted changes, branch diffs, and commits. Use when the user requests an external review, a second opinion on code, a codex review, a gemini review, an antigravity review, or /second-opinion.

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。