Jeden Skill in Manus ausführen
mit einem Klick

Jeden Skill in Manus mit einem Klick ausführen

visual-critique

Sterne3

Forks0

Aktualisiert14. Juli 2026 um 17:30

Run three independent Codex vision inspections of a render, pose, screenshot, or UI, then synthesize a consensus report. Use to verify visible anatomy, geometry, alignment, or polish before proceeding; use design-critique for structured UX feedback and adversarial-review for text artifacts.

Installation

Mit Codex oder Claude installieren Kopieren Sie diesen Prompt, fügen Sie ihn in Codex, Claude oder einen anderen Assistant ein und lassen Sie die Skill-Seite prüfen und installieren.

In Manus ausführen

Quelle

jpvarbed

jpvarbed/jasonv-skills

GitHub-Repository öffnen Creator-Repositorys ansehen

Download

In Manus ausführen

Verwandte BerufeSOC

Basierend auf der SOC-Berufsklassifikation

Softwarequalitätssicherungsanalysten und -testerInformatik- und Mathematikberufe·SOC 15-1253

Datei-Explorer

5 Dateien

SKILL.md

readonly

name	visual-critique
description	Run three independent Codex vision inspections of a render, pose, screenshot, or UI, then synthesize a consensus report. Use to verify visible anatomy, geometry, alignment, or polish before proceeding; use design-critique for structured UX feedback and adversarial-review for text artifacts.

Visual Critique

Run three read-only vision inspections against the same image, then use a fourth Codex pass to keep findings supported by at least two inspections. Gemini is prohibited from this workflow.

Process

Save the render or screenshot as a readable PNG, JPEG, or other Codex-supported image.
Run:

skills/review/visual-critique/visual-critique.sh \
  --focus "check pelvis tilt, knee flex, and spine continuity" \
  path/to/render.png

Verify consensus findings against the image and implementation before changing code. A model critique is evidence to inspect, not proof.

The script attaches the image to three parallel codex exec calls in a read-only sandbox. If any inspection fails or returns empty output, the review fails instead of synthesizing incomplete evidence. The final pass receives only the three textual inspections and returns the consensus.

Errors

Issue	Fix
`codex CLI not found on PATH`	Install/authenticate Codex and confirm `codex --version`.
`cannot read image path`	Pass one readable image path after `--focus`.
An inspection returns nonzero or empty	Read the emitted engine error, fix Codex/auth/capacity, and rerun all three inspections.
The model cannot decode the image	Convert it to PNG first, e.g. `sips -s format png in.heic --out in.png`.

Mehr aus diesem Repository

gleiches Repository

skill-workshop

jpvarbed/jasonv-skills

Build or materially redesign an agent skill from a rough idea or a workflow that just succeeded, with a spec-first design, risk-based evidence, real baseline and with-skill evaluation, blind cross-family forward tests, and a typed completion receipt. Use for “create/add a skill,” “turn what we just did into a skill,” or “redesign a skill's behavior, setup, scripts, or eval.” NOT for prose-only edits (use writing-great-skills), static scoring (use linting-and-scoring), prompt-to-script audits (use determinize-refactor), or installing an existing skill (use skill-installer).

2026-07-193

goal-to-done

jpvarbed/jasonv-skills

Steward one substantial goal from a rough request to verified completion - clarify consequential decisions, compile a verifiable goal brief, walk the closed seven-route cascade to the smallest fit (four outcome routes total-tdd, wayfinder, direct, to-tickets; three interstitial outcomes grilling pass, human pause, no-work receipt), drive the dependency-ready ticket frontier through existing harness and tracker mechanisms, re-plan when evidence invalidates the graph, and finish with integration-level verification against the original rubric. Use when the user says "take this goal to done", "turn this into tickets and drive it through", "steward this project to completion", or asks to run a substantial goal, feature, plan, or goal brief through decomposition and execution. Not for one quick fix (just do it) and not a replacement for any composed mechanism.

2026-07-193

adversarial-review

jpvarbed/jasonv-skills

Run a fast two-persona or deep four-persona adversarial council across live-verified configured seats. Use when asked to “review this plan,” “red-team this spec,” “challenge this decision,” or independently review an ADR, PRD, or diff. Uses ignored per-device profiles and prohibits Gemini and unplanned runtime substitution. NOT for visual UI critique (use visual-critique) or deterministic claim checking (use verify-this).

2026-07-173

total-tdd

jpvarbed/jasonv-skills

Systematic whole-app feature audit → test → fix loop, backed by tracker.py + render.py over one canonical CSV state machine. Inventory every feature into user stories with code-derived expected behavior, then loop: test every story, document errors, fix logic/UX bugs, re-test. Use for "/total-tdd", "auditing an entire app", "building a feature/user-story spec from the code", or a full test-and-fix sweep across all features. Not for a single feature or bug — use `tdd` (red-green-refactor); not for verifying one claim — use `verify-this`; not for reviewing a diff — use `review`.

2026-07-143

goal-spec

jpvarbed/jasonv-skills

Turn a rough task into a launch-ready /goal brief — a verifiable spec with context-access, a verification plan, and a binary rubric — so a dispatched agent runs to completion unattended. Use when prepping a task for "/goal", or when the user says "spec this for goal", "write the rubric", "make this verifiable", "prep a dispatch", or any turn whose real job is assembling the spec+rubric for a later /goal launch. NOT for doing the task yourself (just do it) and NOT for scoring a finished skill (use "linting-and-scoring"). Pairs with "adversarial-review" and "grilling" (stress-test the brief); distinct from "writing-plans"/"to-prd", which produce implementation plans, not verifiable dispatch briefs.

2026-07-133

instruction-conflicts

jpvarbed/jasonv-skills

Audit the layered instruction stack (in-conversation user → soul.md/global → project guide → skill → tool/system) for conflicting or ambiguous directives, and surface which layer should win. Use when the user says "check for instruction conflicts", "do my layers contradict", "audit soul.md vs project/skill", "why is the agent ignoring X", or before relying on a deep skill stack. NOT for scoring one skill's quality (use linting-and-scoring) or auditing whether a skill obeys itself (use the adherence audit). Built from ManyIH (arXiv:2604.09443) via apply-paper.

2026-07-133

name	visual-critique
description	Run three independent Codex vision inspections of a render, pose, screenshot, or UI, then synthesize a consensus report. Use to verify visible anatomy, geometry, alignment, or polish before proceeding; use design-critique for structured UX feedback and adversarial-review for text artifacts.

Visual Critique

Run three read-only vision inspections against the same image, then use a fourth Codex pass to keep findings supported by at least two inspections. Gemini is prohibited from this workflow.

Process

Save the render or screenshot as a readable PNG, JPEG, or other Codex-supported image.
Run:

skills/review/visual-critique/visual-critique.sh \
  --focus "check pelvis tilt, knee flex, and spine continuity" \
  path/to/render.png

Verify consensus findings against the image and implementation before changing code. A model critique is evidence to inspect, not proof.

Errors

Issue	Fix
`codex CLI not found on PATH`	Install/authenticate Codex and confirm `codex --version`.
`cannot read image path`	Pass one readable image path after `--focus`.
An inspection returns nonzero or empty	Read the emitted engine error, fix Codex/auth/capacity, and rerun all three inspections.
The model cannot decode the image	Convert it to PNG first, e.g. `sips -s format png in.heic --out in.png`.