omh-localization-review

name	omh-localization-review
description	["omh"]
Make a product or content release locale-ready with terminology, cultural-fit, and quality-review guidance. Use when the user says	localization review, translation QA, locale glossary, 현지화 검토, 번역 QA, 용어집.
metadata	{"hermes":{"tags":["workflow","oh-my-hermes","review"],"category":"review","phase":"localization-review","role":"reviewer","quality_tier":"review-gated"}}

Localization Review

This is a Hermes-native localization-review workflow skill.

Why This Exists

localization-review makes terminology, context, cultural fit, and locale QA reviewable without treating a drafted translation as a published or visually validated release.

Do Not Use When

• The request is a short sentence or word translation or rewrite with no product or locale QA context; answer directly or use content-operator.
• The user needs fresh rendered UI evidence, clipping checks, or a visual PASS/REVISE/BLOCK verdict; use visual-qa.
• The user asks to edit locale files, push a translation-management-system job, publish strings, or configure localization settings; use workspace-file-operator or connector-operator with explicit target and authority.
• The request asks for a regulatory or contractual conclusion about translated legal text; use legal-compliance-review.

Examples

Good example:

• Prompt: Review our Korean checkout strings for terminology consistency, cultural fit, and context gaps before launch.
• Expected behavior: Prepare the locale and source-version brief, glossary choices, issue matrix, and locale QA criteria.
• Why: The product-release context needs localization review beyond a one-off translation.

Bad example:

• Prompt: Translate 'Your trial ends tomorrow' into Korean.
• Expected behavior: Answer directly or route to content-operator, not localization-review.
• Why: A one-off sentence has no product locale QA or release-review objective.

Completion Checklist

• Findings or no-issue results are grounded in concrete file, artifact, command, or source evidence.
• Open questions, residual risk, and missing verification are named.
• Fixes or follow-up work are separate handoffs unless the user explicitly asked to implement them.

Recovery Notes

• If the reviewed target is missing, inspect the requested artifact or ask one target question.
• If independent verification is unavailable, report the gap and avoid an approval-style claim.

Workflow Lane

• Current lane: Materials and visual summaries (design-orchestration, design-quality-gate, frontend, accessibility-audit, visual-qa, content-operator, media-input-operator, materials-package, +4 more) - web, accessibility, visual QA, files, and packages.
• If intent belongs to another lane, hand back to oh-my-hermes or name the adjacent workflow.
• Shared product, routing, compatibility, and evidence rules: omh-routing/references/skill-common-rail.md.

Use When

Use when multiple strings, a product surface, a market release, or a locale-sensitive document needs terminology, context, consistency, cultural-fit, and QA guidance beyond one-off translation.

Strong routing signals: `localization review`, `translation QA`, `locale glossary`, `현지화 검토`, `번역 QA`, `용어집`

Catalog Metadata

Category: review Phase: localization-review Hermes role: reviewer Quality tier: review-gated Reasoning demand: standard

Quality bar:

• Ground terminology and cultural-fit choices in locale, audience, context, and source version.
• Make string severity, review ownership, and rendered QA gaps explicit.

Handoff policy:

Keep domain framing, clarification, source/evidence synthesis, draft outputs, and next-work routing in Hermes. A prepared brief, review, reply, or plan is not an external action, approval, filing, send, publish, data mutation, implementation, review, CI, or merge claim. Prepare a connector, file, coding, or human-review handoff only when the user explicitly accepts that next step; report it only from observed evidence. Hermes may draft and review language guidance; it does not alter locale files, upload strings, publish translations, validate a rendered build, or claim market approval.

Required inputs:

• locale
• audience
• source version
• product or content context

Expert clarification questions:

• locale
  • English: Which target locale should this localization review cover?
  • Korean: 이 현지화 검토의 대상 로캘은 무엇인가요?

Expected outputs:

• locale/audience/context and source-version brief
• approved-term glossary and transcreation/localization choices
• string/content issue matrix with context, severity, and review owner
• locale QA acceptance criteria and handoff/observed-evidence gaps

Artifact expectations:

• prepared localization review when a wrapper captures it

Safety rules:

• Separate language guidance from rendered UI evidence and market approval.
• Do not claim locale-file changes, translation upload, publication, or rendered validation.

Runtime Evidence

Preferred harness for this skill: critic.

omh runtime record --skill localization-review --harness critic --status started

Record observed delegation results; otherwise return not_available or not_observed. Prepared OMH routing is not execution, review, CI, merge-readiness, or merge evidence.

• Treat wrapper memory/context summaries as advisory local context, not proof of opaque Hermes memory reads or changes. Preserve workflow intent and stop conditions; verify before claiming completion.

Use Hermes-native subagent/delegation features when available: native subagents -> Hermes delegation when available, otherwise sequential lanes.

Shared product, compatibility, topology, memory, harness, and execution rules: omh-routing/references/skill-common-rail.md. Load it when applicable; otherwise name an unavailable capability.