メニュー
Review IronRDP pull requests and diffs using focused protocol, compression, prose, and skeptical passes. Use whenever Copilot code review is requested or a proposed change needs review.
デフォルトでは、最初にソースを確認する Prompt が選択されています。直接コマンドに切り替えるか、ローカルコピーをダウンロードすることもできます。
インストールを決める前に、SKILL.md と SkillsMP に表示されている付属ファイルをお読みください。
Codex または Claude でインストール この Prompt をコピーして Codex、Claude、または他のアシスタントに貼り付けると、Skill ページを確認してインストールできます。
直接コマンドでは確認用 Prompt が省略されます。実行前にソースを確認してください。
npx skills add https://github.com/Devolutions/IronRDP --skill code-reviewコマンドは1行のまま表示されます。コピー前に横へスクロールして全体を確認してください。
ローカルで確認しますか？SkillsMP が現在取得できるファイルをダウンロードできます。
Derive and validate the canonical scope for IronRDP Conventional Commit and pull-request titles. Use whenever composing, reviewing, correcting, or checking a commit or PR title, especially when several crates or product surfaces intersect.
Write or substantially revise a Rust crate's README.md as a concise, user-facing design document. Use whenever creating a crate README, documenting a planned crate, or defining a crate's purpose, role, or interface before implementation.
Create and integrate a new Rust crate in the IronRDP workspace. Use whenever adding, scaffolding, or initializing a crate under crates/, including requests that mention cargo new, a new library package, or registering a crate in the architecture.
SOC 職業分類に基づく
SKILL.md を表示中
| name | code-review |
| description | Review IronRDP pull requests and diffs using focused protocol, compression, prose, and skeptical passes. Use whenever Copilot code review is requested or a proposed change needs review. |
Inspect the diff, its stated goal, and repository guidance before selecting reviewers:
protocol-reviewer only when the change may affect protocol behavior, wire data, negotiation, state transitions, security, codecs, virtual channels, or protocol-visible errors.code-compressor for the changed code.docs-compressor when documentation, rustdoc, explanatory comments, or instructional prose changes.prose-verifier when hand-maintained prose changes in a format where source line breaks are stylistic.skeptical-reviewer last for every diff.Prefer one rubber-duck sub-agent per applicable skill.
Run the protocol, compression, and prose reviews in parallel.
Give every agent the change goal, review scope, base and head references, relevant repository guidance, and an instruction to invoke its named skill, inspect the diff itself, make no edits, and return only evidence-backed findings.
If sub-agents or skill invocation are unavailable, apply the same skills directly and keep the ordering.
Before the skeptical pass, normalize the initial results. Drop claims that lack a concrete location or mechanism, merge findings with the same root cause, and retain disagreements instead of resolving them by vote. Give the skeptical reviewer the diff plus the retained findings and ask it to independently review the change, verify or reject each supplied concern, and identify material issues the focused passes missed.
Evaluate the final evidence yourself. Report correctness and protocol findings first, ordered by severity, then optional compression suggestions. Each retained item needs a location, concrete impact, and actionable correction or simplification. Merge duplicates across reviewers and do not inflate a maintainability preference into a defect. Briefly name skipped reviewers and why; if nothing material remains, say that no findings were identified.