メニュー
Review a GitHub epic issue to surface unclarity, ambiguousness, or vagueness in its User Problem and User Stories sections. Use when user wants to review an epic, check an epic for gaps, or mentions "review epic".
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。
SOC 職業分類に基づく
Use when deciding how deeply to review a PR, which reviewers to involve, or whether to accept a large agentic PR
Plan test coverage and the TDD workflow for a GitHub issue through a grill-me interview, then produce an execution-ready plan doc (grounding, test locations, red/green steps, PR breakdown, review gates, task-list bookkeeping) at the repo root. Use when asked to plan a TDD implementation, plan which tests to add for an issue, or scope out test coverage before writing code.
Use ONLY when Nico explicitly invokes it (typically via /pdp-confidence-update) to write, prepare, or reconstruct the weekly PDP confidence update for a project channel. Do NOT trigger automatically from general Slack/status questions. Reconstructs the channel since the last `!pdp progress` post and drafts a ready-to-post update in Nico's house style.
Produces Nico's daily stand-up reply — "Yesterday", "Today", and "Blockers or risks" sections in his house style, organized by his current P1/P2/P3 epics with everything else under "Also" — then posts each as a separate Geekbot reply in his Slack DM once he agrees on the wording. Use when Nico asks to write his daily stand-up, stand-up message, Geekbot reply, or to summarize yesterday's work for stand-up.
Use when reviewing a PR in camunda/camunda that touches AGENTS.md, skills under .claude/skills/, the way the project uses ADRs, or the way the project uses architecture docs (not new ADRs or architecture docs themselves) — i.e., Agent-Ready initiative PRs
Use when user shares an error message, stack trace, or log snippet to investigate — or when investigating an incident that has a concrete error artifact (log line, exception, failed assertion). Skip when the incident has no error artifact, e.g. performance regressions, throughput/latency drops, capacity issues, or behavioral discrepancies without logs.
| name | review-epic |
| description | Review a GitHub epic issue to surface unclarity, ambiguousness, or vagueness in its User Problem and User Stories sections. Use when user wants to review an epic, check an epic for gaps, or mentions "review epic". |
Review the GitHub epic issue provided by the user. Focus exclusively on the User Problem and User Stories sections.
Produce a short list of pointed questions that surface any:
Group questions into two sections:
For each question, reference what part of the issue it relates to.
Rules:
