同じ正規化済みデータと実行条件でZephyrの変更前後を比較し、Finelogの段階別指標からCPU使用時間、処理時間、メモリの変化を評価するスキル。
- PR前後のZephyr性能を比較したいとき
- 高速化に伴うCPU使用量の増加確認
- 最大メモリとメモリ不足の悪化確認
Marinのプルリクエストを、差分の整理・検証から公開、CIやレビューへの対応まで管理するスキル。Issueに基づく修正や途中段階のコミットにも対応します。
Prepare, publish, update, and monitor a Marin pull request, including issue-driven fixes and requested commit or push checkpoints.
実行スコア 未検証
インストール方法を見るMarinのプルリクエストを出す側の作業を、変更の整理から公開後の対応まで進めます。差分から不要なコードや無関係な変更を除き、整形・静的チェック、必要なテストを経てコミットします。ブランチ全体のレビューを行い、指摘に対応してからPRを作成・更新します。明示的に割り当てられたGitHub Issueでは、原因や作業の重複を調べて修正に進みます。
変更をレビューに出せる状態へ整えたいときや、公開後のCIとコメントへの対応まで任せたいときに向いています。作業途中の区切りとして、整理・検証・コミット・pushまで進める依頼にも対応します。
Marin固有の文書・スクリプトと、git、gh、uvを使う手順です。独立した評価はreview-pr、明示的な簡素化はsimplify-codeの担当です。公開後はCI成功だけで終了せず、マージ・クローズ、停止依頼、または12時間の待機終了まで監視します。強制pushには明示的な許可が必要です。
この紹介文は、公開されている SKILL.md をもとに AI(OpenAI Codex)が作成しました。正確な仕様は下の原文を確認してください。
インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
Own the author-side workflow from a reviewable change through publication and
feedback. For an explicitly assigned GitHub issue, first read
issue-driven fixes; it covers diagnosis and duplicate
work before implementation. Other implementation tasks use their domain skill
until the change is ready to publish. review-pr owns independent assessment;
simplify-code owns an explicitly requested cleanup.
Before authoring a commit or PR title or body, read:
docs/dev-guide/writing-style/index.mddocs/dev-guide/writing-style/pull-requests.mddocs/dev-guide/writing-style/ai-writing-donts.mdClean and format the diff, commit it, then run advisory review and independent validation concurrently. Resolve their results before pushing and publishing, then monitor the PR. A WIP checkpoint may stop after clean-up, lint, staging, commit, and push.
Read the complete branch diff and remove dead code, weak tests, stale prose, debugging artifacts, and unrelated changes.
If the diff touches tests and this commit is intended for a PR or review, read
root TESTING.md and the relevant module-specific AGENTS.md or testing docs
as part of this self-review. Apply TESTING.md's behavioral-value gate to every
changed test. Delete disposable probes and low-value tests before a PR-ready
commit.
./infra/pre-commit.py --changed-files --fix # diff-scoped; use --all-files for a full sweep
This is the required entry point; do not substitute uv run pre-commit, skip
hooks, or weaken checks.
Finish automatic fixes before starting concurrent readers of the diff. This entry point also runs Pyrefly when applicable; do not repeat an equivalent standalone type check on unchanged inputs.
Review git status and git diff, then stage only this task's explicit files.
Never stage secrets or unrelated work.
Follow docs/dev-guide/writing-style/pull-requests.md for the commit subject and body.
Review the exact message before committing. After the commit, inspect it with
git show -s --format='%s%n%n%b' HEAD; do not push if a tool added attribution,
a session trailer, or other text that was not in the reviewed message.
If a hook fails, fix the issue and create a new commit. Do not amend unless the user asks.
If there are no changes to commit, say so and stop.
After the initial commit, launch advisory review alongside affected tests. Use separate command sessions or the runtime's concurrent tool calls; retain each process handle, output, and exit status. Do not wait for test results to start the review.
./infra/pre-commit.py --review --calling-agent=claude
The advisory review is required before every PR. It reviews the whole branch diff against the merge base, including uncommitted work.
Set --calling-agent to your agent (claude or codex) and run the review
without asking for confirmation.
Run these checks while the review proceeds, concurrently where independent:
uv run --no-project infra/ci/run_tests.py for affected safe unit tests.
Do not override the repository's default marker expression.uv run python infra/check_docs_source_links.py.uv run mkdocs build --strict.While commands run, draft the PR title/body and gather issue links. Keep the
reviewed files and Git base stable until all readers finish: reviewers inspect
the live checkout throughout their run. Do not edit, auto-fix, rebase, or run
checks that rewrite reviewed files concurrently. The affected-test runner syncs
the checkout's .venv; serialize other commands that sync that environment.
For example, queue docs checks behind tests while review continues, or use
uv run --no-sync for docs checks once their dependencies are installed and
the environment sync has finished. Serialize commands that share mutable
outputs. Reuse existing environments and shared caches.
Reuse passing checks from implementation when their inputs remain unchanged. Run only outstanding checks and those invalidated by subsequent edits. Prefer the affected-test runner over a full suite unless the change requires broader coverage.
Artifacts from advisory review are written under
/tmp/marin-linter/<branch>/<timestamp>-<uniq>/.
Wait for every started command and inspect its output and exit status before
pushing or publishing. A launched process is not a completed check; advisory
review can exit successfully while reporting findings or an incomplete run.
Confirm it actually reviewed the branch and inspect its findings and failures.
Resolve every finding, checking the matching infra/lint rule, and fix failed
checks. Put fixes in a new commit after validating the affected behavior.
Do not recursively rerun --review after small, targeted touch-ups made in
response to its findings. Validate behavioral edits with the normal mechanical
checks and relevant tests. For a formatter-only mechanical edit, rerun formatting
and lint checks only. Rerun the advisory review only when the follow-up materially
changes the branch's implementation approach or scope, or when the user asks for
another pass. Apply the same rule to fixes prompted by tests or docs checks.
Push when requested or when the branch has an upstream. Use
git push -u origin HEAD when needed. Stop on rejection; do not force-push
without explicit authorization.
The PR body becomes the squash-merge commit message. Follow
docs/dev-guide/writing-style/pull-requests.md.
Add Fixes #NNNN or Part of #NNNN only when an existing issue applies.
Inspect the payload. Draft the body in a uniquely named temporary file and
use --body-file. Re-open that file and apply the final compression pass before
publishing. After creating or editing the PR, fetch the
exact title,body with gh pr view --json and immediately correct text inserted
by a tool or stale template.
Push to the main repository unless direct access is unavailable or the user asks for a fork:
gh pr create --title "<title>" --body-file "<body-file>" \
--label agent-generated --label agentic-lint
agent-generated label.agentic-lint only after advisory review completed and every finding was fixed or answered.
The label records that lint pass; without it, CI launches a Loom lint review.Fixes #NNNN when addressing a pre-existing issue.Green CI is not an exit condition. Monitor every PR until it merges or closes, the user tells you to stop, or a 12-hour wait times out.
Before the first wait, read every current issue comment, inline review comment, and submitted review once, then address anything actionable. This is a one-time inspection, not a monitoring loop. The comment and review arms establish a baseline when they start and wake only for later new or edited feedback.
If Loom is available, set one honest status immediately before waiting:
loom status set --tag ok --message "waiting for PR #<N> events"
Do not refresh that status while nothing changes. Invoke one wait_for.py
process in the foreground and keep it attached until it exits:
uv run scripts/ci/wait_for.py --timeout 12h \
"github.ci <N>" "github.pr <N>" \
"github.pr_comment <N>" "github.review <N>"
The command's --timeout 12h is the only timeout. Do not background or detach
the process, wrap it in a shell timeout, or give the command runner or agent a
shorter deadline. A tool reporting that the command is still running does not
end the foreground wait. Give the process handle back to the runtime's blocking
wait/resume facility and continue waiting for that same process to exit. Repeat
the blocking resume as often as the execution interface requires.
github.pr covers terminal merged/closed state, merge conflicts,
ready-for-review transitions, and review-decision changes. It does not inspect
comment or review bodies, so it does not replace github.pr_comment or
github.review. Keep all three arms. Monitoring must not use a raw poll shell
expression, gh pr checks --watch, or repeated gh pr view calls.
The wait owns its exponential backoff. While it is running:
wait_for.py;The command prints one JSON object and exits: 0 means an arm fired, 2 means
the overall timeout elapsed, and 1 means the wait failed. An event is not
always a successful verdict. Read result.conclusion for github.ci and
result.reasons for github.pr.
Act on the event, read any feedback that arrived concurrently, then re-arm:
github.ci — on failure, read the failing job log and fix the
regression. A failure in an untouched file is not automatically
pre-existing: confirm the same job fails on main independently before
treating it as unrelated. Once CI finishes, omit github.ci from the next
wait because its terminal result would fire immediately. Add it back after a
push starts a new run.github.pr — merged and closed are terminal. Resolve conflicted
before re-arming; an unchanged conflict is intentionally reported again by a
fresh wait. ready_for_review and review_decision describe review-state
changes in the attached snapshots. When review_decision fires, inspect the
submitted review because the lifecycle payload does not include its body.github.pr_comment / github.review — address every actionable human
and agent comment. Prefix agent-authored replies with 🤖 and resolve the
thread. The default significant-comment filter ignores the authenticated
user's comments, review-bot progress placeholders, clean verdicts, wrappers,
Loom's exact Working on this in loom: <session URL> acknowledgement, and
Loom access-control replies addressed to a bot.Re-arm after every non-terminal event. Once CI finishes, omit github.ci so its
terminal result does not fire immediately; keep github.pr,
github.pr_comment, and github.review armed for later feedback. Read current
feedback once before each re-arm so simultaneous events are not absorbed into a
new baseline without being handled.
A question requiring user input pauses monitoring: raise attention, ask the
question, and resume after the answer. Otherwise the only exit conditions are a
merged or closed PR, an explicit request to stop, or a 12-hour timeout.
まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
ログインなしで書き込めます。使ってみた感想、質問、動かなかった環境などを気軽にどうぞ。
まだコメントはありません。最初のコメントを書いてみませんか。
同じ正規化済みデータと実行条件でZephyrの変更前後を比較し、Finelogの段階別指標からCPU使用時間、処理時間、メモリの変化を評価するスキル。
Hugging Faceのデータセットを全件ダウンロードせずに構造を調べ、本文の項目やデータ区分を確認してMarin用の登録モジュールを追加するスキル。
GCPのリソース権限やCloud RunのIAP閲覧権限の依頼を、必要最小限のロールと暗号化した個人識別情報を使うPulumi変更・PRにまとめるスキル。
JAXの計算を担うPallas/Mosaicカーネルを追加・改修し、参照実装との値・勾配の一致確認からAPI整備、性能測定、指定時の調整まで進めるスキル。
Grug/Grugformerの実験用コピーでモデルや学習処理を変更し、差分と結果を記録して、有効だった変更を基本テンプレートへ反映するスキル。
Marinの実験レポートを集めて索引を整理し、指定された過去の実験をタグとIssueへの参照でアーカイブするスキル。既存の結論や正式なリンクを保ちます。