Loading...
Loading...
Found 47 Skills
Designs and verifies the path a stranger walks to their first merged contribution on an open-source project - the CONTRIBUTING file, the good-first-issue queue, a clone-to-passing-tests command that works cold, and the first-pull-request review and recognition loop, scored against a blocking-plus-weighted rubric. Use whenever someone says "nobody contributes to my project", "write a CONTRIBUTING.md", "our good first issues get no takers", "first-time contributors disappear", "contributor onboarding", "first pull request experience", or "how do we get more open-source contributors" - even if they only complain about a lonely repo. Not triage-system design - use samber/developer-relations-skills@oss-issue-triage. Not governance or CLA choice.
Devil's Advocate stress-testing for code, architecture, PRs, and decisions. Surfaces hidden flaws through structured adversarial analysis with metacognitive depth. Use for high-stakes review, stress-testing choices, or when the user wants problems found deliberately. NOT for routine code review (use engineering:code-review). Triggers on "스트레스 테스트", "stress test", "devil's advocate", "반론", "이거 괜찮아", "문제 없을까", "깊은 리뷰", "critical review", "adversarial".
Safely track pull request feedback, resolve review comments or merge conflicts, validate fixes, and use a read-only cross-review before committing or pushing follow-up changes.
Perform security-focused review of code diffs and pull requests, identifying newly introduced vulnerabilities, security regressions, and unsafe patterns in changed code.
Use when preparing a pull request for merge: inspect diffs, collect checks and review comments, classify findings, fix safe issues, verify, and loop until merge-ready.
Browse and review open learning PRs in the configured groovebook repo. Use to participate in the shared groove commons.
Use when reviewing pull requests, conducting code quality audits, or identifying security vulnerabilities. Invoke for PR reviews, code quality checks, refactoring suggestions.
Review pull requests for code quality, security issues, and best practices. Use when reviewing PRs, checking code changes, or analyzing diffs before merge.
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the author.
Review a pull request or a branch against the repository's standards — skill frontmatter and body, docs and bilingual pairs, Agent Notes, and scripts — and report blockers separately from suggestions, prioritizing correctness and required behavior over style.
Automated code review for pull requests using specialized review patterns. Analyzes code for quality, security, performance, and best practices. Use when reviewing code changes, PRs, or doing code audits.
Reviewing a code change — a pull request, a branch or commit-range diff, or a post-implementation self-review of your own work before calling it done. Not for writing the change, only for judging one that already exists. Covers the reviewer-mode reset and diff scoping, a four-tier severity scale with fixed floors, evidence-based reporting with file-line citations and fix snippets, escalation for high-risk changes, a posted/CI overlay that collapses to Important/Nit, and lenses for correctness, maintainability, security, testing, and performance. Self-contained, so it works installed on its own.