Exécutez n'importe quel Skill dans Manus
en un clic

Exécutez n'importe quel Skill dans Manus en un clic

Commencer

ilchul-code-review

Étoiles0

Forks0

Mis à jour15 mai 2026 à 19:40

Repo-local guidance for isolated Ilchul review runners that produce structured, low-noise findings.

Installation

Installer avec Codex ou Claude Copiez ce prompt, collez-le dans Codex, Claude ou un autre assistant, puis laissez-le vérifier la page du skill et l'installer pour vous.

Exécuter dans Manus

Source

devkade

devkade/ilchul

Ouvrir le dépôt GitHub Voir les dépôts du créateur

Téléchargement

Exécuter dans Manus

Métiers associésSOC

Basé sur la classification professionnelle SOC

Analystes en assurance qualité des logiciels et testeursProfessions informatiques et mathématiques·SOC 15-1253

SKILL.md

readonly

name	ilchul-code-review
description	Repo-local guidance for isolated Ilchul review runners that produce structured, low-noise findings.

Ilchul Code Review Guidance

Review priorities, in order:

Correctness and broken contracts.
Security, permissions, tokens, sessions, privacy, and data-loss risk.
Tests and verification evidence for changed behavior.
Maintainability and operational risk.
Performance risk when the diff plausibly affects runtime cost.
Documentation accuracy for changed public behavior.

Finding rules:

Use BLOCKER only for concrete merge-blocking bugs, security/data-loss risk, broken API contracts, unsafe migrations, or missing critical tests for high-risk behavior.
A blocker must name file/line, issue, why it matters, suggested fix, evidence/reasoning, confidence, and mergeBlocking=true.
Use QUESTION for uncertainty; do not assert a defect without evidence.
Suppress cosmetic nitpick floods and repeated lint output.
Collapse repeated pattern findings into one evidence-backed finding with multiple locations when possible.
Include a final approval summary only when no blockers remain and required evidence is present.

This guidance is advisory reviewer input. Deterministic schema validation, risk policy, current-head checks, and decision mapping remain harness responsibilities.

Plus depuis ce dépôt

même dépôt

kapi-ralph

devkade/ilchul

Ralph build workflow for Kapi. Use when /kapi-ralph is active or when implementing from a prepared Ralph workspace with AGENTS.md, IMPLEMENTATION_PLAN.md, specs, shared state.json, handoff.json, verify.md, one-task iterations, validation backpressure, and reviewer closeout.

2026-05-160

kapi-ralplan

devkade/ilchul

Ralph planning workflow for Kapi. Use when a Ralph workspace needs interview-driven planning, specs, AGENTS.md, IMPLEMENTATION_PLAN.md, state.json, handoff.json, and critic/architect consensus before /kapi-ralph execution.

2026-05-160

kapi-workflow

devkade/ilchul

Use when an active Kapi workflow is in context or the user explicitly asks for /kapi-* workflow structure. Preserve thin-by-default behavior and follow the active workflow contract, artifacts, evidence, and worker guidance.

2026-05-160

issue-pr-revision-authoring

devkade/ilchul

Write implementation-ready GitHub issues, engineering-report PR bodies, and current-head revision comments without importing repo-specific policy.

2026-05-150

kapi-deep-interview

devkade/ilchul

Kapi-bundled Deep Interview guidance for main-agent, artifact-backed requirements discovery before Ralph or Autoresearch handoff.

2026-05-090

name	ilchul-code-review
description	Repo-local guidance for isolated Ilchul review runners that produce structured, low-noise findings.

Ilchul Code Review Guidance

Review priorities, in order:

Correctness and broken contracts.
Security, permissions, tokens, sessions, privacy, and data-loss risk.
Tests and verification evidence for changed behavior.
Maintainability and operational risk.
Performance risk when the diff plausibly affects runtime cost.
Documentation accuracy for changed public behavior.

Finding rules:

Use BLOCKER only for concrete merge-blocking bugs, security/data-loss risk, broken API contracts, unsafe migrations, or missing critical tests for high-risk behavior.
A blocker must name file/line, issue, why it matters, suggested fix, evidence/reasoning, confidence, and mergeBlocking=true.
Use QUESTION for uncertainty; do not assert a defect without evidence.
Suppress cosmetic nitpick floods and repeated lint output.
Collapse repeated pattern findings into one evidence-backed finding with multiple locations when possible.
Include a final approval summary only when no blockers remain and required evidence is present.

This guidance is advisory reviewer input. Deterministic schema validation, risk policy, current-head checks, and decision mapping remain harness responsibilities.