Loading...
Loading...
Found 206 Skills
Review a plan with Critic
Use OpenAI's Codex CLI as an independent code reviewer to provide second opinions on code implementations, architectural decisions, code specifications, and pull requests. Trigger when users request code review, second opinion, independent review, architecture validation, or mention Codex review. Provides unbiased analysis using GPT-5-Codex model through the codex exec command for non-interactive reviews.
Three-lens code review using parallel subagents: Epimetheus (hindsight — bugs, debt, fragility), Metis (craft — clarity, idiom, fit-for-purpose), Prometheus (foresight — vision, extensibility, future-Claude). Triggers on /titans, /review, 'review this code', 'what did I miss', 'before I ship this'. Use after completing substantial work, before /close. (user)
Architecture analysis, violation detection, and pattern validation. USE WHEN: reviewing code architecture, identifying violations, verifying patterns, updating technical documentation. Reference: docs/02-architecture/ARCHITECTURE.md Examples: <example> Context: User wants to check if code follows architecture. user: "Analyze if the payment module follows our architecture" assistant: "I'll use architecture-analyzer to review against ARCHITECTURE.md." <commentary>Architectural review is architecture-analyzer specialty.</commentary> </example> <example> Context: Need to identify technical debt. user: "Find architectural violations in the services layer" assistant: "I'll use architecture-analyzer to scan for violations." <commentary>Violation detection is architecture-analyzer responsibility.</commentary> </example>
Guides release testing from T-14 planning through Go/No-Go, deployment, and post-release. Covers functional, regression, performance, security, accessibility. Use when planning or executing release testing.
Fix a reported bug by first enhancing tests until the bug is reproduced, then fixing the implementation, and finally confirming the enhanced tests pass.
Use anime-style multi-role continuous conversational code review to output review opinions with natural technical anchors through strong character interaction
Follow this sub-process when fixing bugs—turn the verbal description of "discovered a problem" into a closed loop of verification and repair, leaving three documents in the middle: issue report, root cause analysis, and repair record. This process adds a buffer between "seeing the problem" and "starting to modify code", avoiding several common pitfalls: the problem description in your mind disappears after modification, fixing only the surface without analyzing the root cause, uncontrollable expansion of repair scope that cannot be traced, and not knowing if the fix is correct without verification after modification. This skill only acts as a router, deciding which of report / analyze / fix to proceed with based on existing outputs. For simple problems that can be identified at a glance, a fast track will be taken, skipping the two middle steps and only keeping the fix-note.
Skill Tester
Adversarial code review that assumes bugs exist and hunts for them. Use when asked to review code, find bugs, audit for correctness, stress-test a PR, or when someone says "tear this apart" or "what's wrong with this". Give no benefit of the doubt — every line is guilty until proven innocent.
Use when performing a CTO-level PR review — includes staging evidence gate for infra/backend PRs.
pytest, data validation, Great Expectations, and quality assurance for data systems