Loading...
Loading...
Found 955 Skills
Use this skill when the user asks to review a PR, do a code review, check a pull request, "review this PR", "review-pr", or "look at this pull request". Requires Gitee MCP Server to be configured.
Simplify and refine TYPO3 extension code for clarity, consistency, and maintainability while preserving functionality. Reviews PHP classes, Fluid templates, TCA, Services.yaml, and ext_localconf/ext_tables for TYPO3 v14 best practices. Run after implementing a feature or before merging a PR. Use when working with simplify, clean up, refine, code quality, reduce complexity, readability, maintainability, review code, polish, TYPO3 code review.
Python coding standards and best practices. Applicable to code generation, code review, and code refactoring scenarios.
This skill should be used when the user asks to "add mypy to a project", "set up static type checking", "fix mypy errors", "configure mypy", "annotate Python code with types", or needs guidance on Python type checking best practices with mypy.
Parallel 3-reviewer code review orchestration: launch Security, Business-Logic, and Architecture reviewers simultaneously, aggregate findings by severity, and produce a unified BLOCK/FIX/APPROVE verdict. Use when reviewing PRs with 5+ files, security-sensitive changes, new features needing broad coverage, or when user requests "parallel review", "comprehensive review", or "full review". Do NOT use for single-file fixes, documentation-only changes, or when systematic-code-review (sequential) is sufficient.
Fetch PR feedback from all GitHub sources and validate every comment before acting. Use when user needs to process PR review comments, address reviewer feedback, or triage pull request discussions. Use for "review comments", "PR feedback", "address reviews", "address feedback", or "what did reviewers say". Do NOT use for creating new PRs, code review of local changes, or general code analysis without an existing PR.
Human reviewer self-review for backend PRs — naming, complexity, DB schema, test design, type precision. Use when user says "review my PR", "check my PR", "human review", or wants design/readability feedback. Applies to any TypeScript backend; pair with pr-review-frontend for full-stack PRs.
Run Gemini CLI review against the current branch, fix only the review comments that are still valid for the current codebase, and leave invalid comments unchanged.
Nuclear-grade 16-agent pre-publish release gate. Runs /get-unpublished-changes to detect all changes since last npm release, spawns up to 10 ultrabrain agents for deep per-change analysis, invokes /review-work (5 agents) for holistic review, and 1 oracle for overall release synthesis. Use before EVERY npm publish. Triggers: 'pre-publish review', 'review before publish', 'release review', 'pre-release review', 'ready to publish?', 'can I publish?', 'pre-publish', 'safe to publish', 'publishing review', 'pre-publish check'.
Analyzes staged and unstaged files from the full working tree, groups them into functional clusters (test, docs, chore, directory prefix), generates a conventional commit message per group, detects common issues (secrets, debug statements, large files), and executes one commit per group sequentially after presenting a multi-commit plan for confirmation. Falls through to a single-commit flow when all detected files resolve to one group. Trigger: When the user says "commit", "smart commit", or /commit.
Follow this sub-process when fixing bugs — turn the verbal description of "problem found" into a closed loop from verification to repair, leaving three documents: problem report, root cause analysis, and repair record. This process adds a buffer between "seeing the problem" and "starting to modify code" to avoid common pitfalls: the problem description in your mind disappears after the fix, you only fix the surface without analyzing the root cause, the scope of repair expands and cannot be traced, and you don't know 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 artifacts. For simple problems that can be identified at a glance, a fast track will be taken, skipping the two middle steps and only retaining the fix-note.
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).