Loading...
Loading...
Found 920 Skills
Run a formal, multi-dimensional code review of a pull request. Reads the PR diff, classifies change types, dispatches parallel reviewers by dimension (correctness, consistency, docs-sync, plus conditional security/edge-cases/UX/performance/structure/maintainability), and synthesizes findings into an actionable punch list. Use when the user asks to review a PR, run /deep-review, mark a PR as ready for review, or requests a formal/thorough code review.
Phase 2 of the feature workflow —— Write code according to the implementation sequence in {slug}-design.md, and submit a completion report in a unified format for user review after finishing. Prerequisites: {slug}-design.md has been approved (standard design includes test design, or fastforward design includes acceptance criteria), and {slug}-checklist.yaml exists in the same directory. Trigger scenarios: User says "The plan is confirmed, start implementation", "Write code according to the plan", "Start working". If you encounter situations not covered by the plan during implementation (new concepts, out-of-scope files, need for patch branches), proactively stop and go back to discuss the plan instead of pushing forward blindly.
Enter this sub-process when conducting code optimization — handle tasks where 'behavior remains unchanged, structure changes' (structure / performance / readability). Shift single-module internal optimization from 'AI random refactoring' to 'first scan to generate a checklist, confirm each item with the user, execute step-by-step according to the method library, and require manual approval for each step'. Trigger scenarios: Users mention phrases like 'optimize it / refactor / rewrite / split it / poor performance / code is too long' without any accompanying behavior changes. Do not handle new requirements (route to feature), bugs (route to issue), or cross-module architecture restructuring (route to architecture + decisions).
· Run combined code-review, anti-slop, security-audit, and update-docs pass. Triggers: 'full review', 'review everything', 'audit this repo', 'full check', 'run all checks'. Not for single-dimension audits.
Review Go implementations against spec acceptance tests. References go-conventions and agent-conduct.
Iterative self-review loop after implementing a plan. Re-read changed code with fresh eyes, fix issues found, re-run quality checks, repeat until clean. For UI work, includes visual verification (view the rendered page). Use after evanflow-executing-plans completes; on success, report and stop — the user decides what's next.
Guidance for receiving and responding to code review feedback. Use when addressing PR review comments, incorporating reviewer suggestions, or managing review discussions.
Subjects every non-trivial decision to a fresh-context adversarial review before it stands. Use when correctness matters more than speed, when working in unfamiliar code, when stakes are high (production, security-sensitive logic, irreversible operations), or any time a confident output would be cheaper to verify now than to debug later.
Sign, verify, and track fix-marker regressions over time using a deterministic Ed25519 witness manifest. Works in any project — clone the toolkit, run init, register fixes, regen on each release.
Use when writing, fixing, editing, or refactoring React components, hooks, state, effects, JSX, or React tests in TypeScript projects.
Use when writing, fixing, or editing TypeScript async flows, promises, retries, timeouts, cancellation, shared mutable state across awaits, race conditions, or flaky async tests.
Use when fixing, editing, changing, or debugging existing TypeScript code and keeping changes small and proportional to what was touched.