Menú
Run lint, type-check, tests across both repos (auto-detects which to run)
Instalar con Codex o Claude Copia este prompt, pégalo en Codex, Claude u otro asistente, y deja que revise la página de la skill y la instale por ti.
Basado en la clasificación ocupacional SOC
Deep code review of a diff across both Orbit repos against one shared rubric, orchestrating the five review subagents and a backward-compat guard. Use when the user asks to review a PR, file, folder, or staged changes in orbit-ui-mobile or orbit-api. Replaces /review and /security-review.
Get an independent cross-model second opinion (GLM-5.2 via opencode) on a specific, load-bearing technical claim or a Critical code-review finding — a different model reads the claim + code and returns AGREE / DISAGREE / UNSURE. Use to stress-test a single Critical finding, a risky assertion, or a close call before you commit to it. Auto-fired inside /pr-review on each Critical finding that survives the skeptic. Not for open-ended research (use /deep-research) or multi-lens judgement (use /llm-council).
Break a PRD into GitHub issues across orbit-ui-mobile + orbit-api
Answer an open-ended "what's the best way to…?" question with orchestrated multi-agent deep web research. Decompose the question, fan out narrow research subagents in parallel, verify the load-bearing claims adversarially, iterate to saturation, then synthesize ONE opinionated, source-backed, decision-ready recommendation. Orbit-aware (dual-repo stack, solo-dev cost calibration). Use for technology/vendor choices, architecture & tooling decisions, cost comparisons, migration approaches, or best-practice questions — anything whose answer needs current external evidence beyond the codebase. Not for code edits, single-fact lookups, or questions answerable from the repo alone.
Create implementation plan with cross-repo codebase analysis
Prime agent with Orbit project context (both repos + optional GitHub issue)
| name | validate |
| description | Run lint, type-check, tests across both repos (auto-detects which to run) |
| argument-hint | ["frontend|backend|both"] |
Run all validation checks and report results.
Input: $ARGUMENTS (default: both)
If $ARGUMENTS is not provided, auto-detect: check git status in each repo. Run validation for any repo with uncommitted changes. If both are clean, default to both.
cd "C:\Users\thoma\Documents\Programming\Projects\orbit-ui-mobile"
npm run lint
npm run type-check
npm test
cd "C:\Users\thoma\Documents\Programming\Projects\orbit-api"
dotnet build
dotnet test
## Validation Results
### orbit-ui-mobile
| Check | Result | Details |
|-------|--------|---------|
| Lint | PASS / FAIL | {N errors or "passed"} |
| Type check | PASS / FAIL | {N errors or "passed"} |
| Tests | PASS / FAIL | {N passed, M failed} |
### orbit-api
| Check | Result | Details |
|-------|--------|---------|
| Build | PASS / FAIL | {warnings/errors} |
| Tests | PASS / FAIL | {N passed, M failed} |
### Summary
- **Status**: ALL PASSING / {N} FAILURES
- **Action needed**: {None / list}
For each failure, list:
Example:
### Failures
1. **ui-mobile / apps/web/hooks/use-habits.ts:42**
- Error: `Type 'string' is not assignable to type 'number'`
- Fix: Check the type annotation or value
2. **api / src/Orbit.Application/Habits/Commands/CreateHabit.cs:18**
- Error: `CS0029: Cannot implicitly convert 'string' to 'int'`
- Fix: Add explicit cast or change the type