القائمة
Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
استنادا إلى تصنيف SOC المهني
Autonomous developer iteration loop driven by a thin orchestrator that dispatches coder/reviewer/diagnoser subagents. Pick a mode — fix (make tests green), feature (implement one or more features), optimize (push a metric), debug (root-cause a failure), ab-test (race candidate implementations), or prototype (explore design variants) — define a verification signal, confirm the plan with the user, then loop implement → verify → review → commit with all state kept in loop-log.md. Use when the user states a concrete engineering goal or says "keep iterating", "loop on this", "autoloop", or "iterate until fixed".
Break a plan, spec, or PRD into independently-grabbable issues on the project issue tracker using tracer-bullet vertical slices.
Turn the current conversation into a PRD and publish it to the project issue tracker — no interview, just synthesis of what you've already discussed.
Move issues and external PRs through a state machine of triage roles — categorise, verify, grill if needed, and write agent-ready briefs.
Keeps the tswift project website in sync with runtime implementation changes — coverage numbers, feature tables, WASM binary, and content. Use when features are implemented, coverage changes, the runtime is updated, or the user asks to update/sync/refresh the website.
Spawn a pi subagent to handle a specific task in a separate process. Use when the user asks to delegate work to a subagent, run a task in parallel, or says "spawn a subagent", "use a subagent", or "run this with pi".
| name | requesting-code-review |
| description | Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements |
Dispatch a Pi code reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade. The reviewer gets precisely crafted context for evaluation — never your session's history. This keeps the reviewer focused on the work product, not your thought process, and preserves your own context for continued work.
Core principle: Review early, review often.
Mandatory:
Optional but valuable:
1. Get git SHAs:
BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1) # or origin/main
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
2. Dispatch code reviewer subagent:
Dispatch a general-purpose subagent, filling the template at code-reviewer.md
Placeholders:
{DESCRIPTION} - Brief summary of what you built{PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS} - What it should do{BASE_SHA} - Starting commit{HEAD_SHA} - Ending commit3. Act on feedback:
[Just completed Task 2: Add verification function]
You: Let me request code review before proceeding.
BASE_SHA=$(git log --oneline | grep "Task 1" | head -1 | awk '{print $1}')
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
[Dispatch code reviewer subagent]
DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types
PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from docs/superpowers/plans/deployment-plan.md
BASE_SHA: a7981ec
HEAD_SHA: 3df7661
[Subagent returns]:
Strengths: Clean architecture, real tests
Issues:
Important: Missing progress indicators
Minor: Magic number (100) for reporting interval
Assessment: Ready to proceed
You: [Fix progress indicators]
[Continue to Task 3]
Subagent-Driven Development:
Executing Plans:
Ad-Hoc Development:
Never:
If reviewer wrong:
See template at: code-reviewer.md