メニュー
Parallel multi-agent review for Laboratory changes. Prioritizes correctness, scientific validity, provenance, tests, and harness fit. Trigger: /code-review, /review, /critique.
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
Assess and improve codebase readiness for AI coding agents. Dispatches parallel subagents to evaluate style, testing, docs, architecture, CI, observability, security, and dev environment. Produces a scored report with prioritized remediation. Then executes the highest-impact fixes. Use when: "agent readiness", "is this codebase agent-ready", "readiness report", "make this codebase agent-friendly", "agent-ready assessment", "readiness audit", "prepare for agents". Trigger: /agent-readiness, /readiness.
Dialectical premise-and-alternatives audit for a plan, spec, or context packet. Four moves: premise challenge (is this the right problem?), mandatory structurally-distinct alternatives, cross-model outside voice, user-ratified convergence. Operationalizes the AGENTS.md "Diverge Before You Converge" doctrine at the plan-review stage. Use when: about to commit to a plan/spec/design, reviewing a ticket before shape, when "is this the right problem" would be useful, or any time a proposal smells like a symptom fix instead of a root-cause fix. Trigger: /ceo-review, /challenge, /premise-check.
Laboratory CI gate audit and verification workflow. Use when checking whether experiment, harness, analysis, docs, or Spellbook harness changes are safe to ship. Trigger: /ci, /gates.
Take one Laboratory backlog item to merge-ready. Composes /shape, /implement, /code-review, /ci, /refactor, and /qa as needed. Stops before merge. Trigger: /deliver.
Capture and share what changed — every app has a demo path; the format depends on the change and the audience. The spectrum runs from a release-notes blurb ("no demo needed, here's what moved") through a curl + JSON paste, a terminal recording, a screenshot, a GIF, up to a polished narrated launch video. Pick the path that fits the change shape (UI / API / CLI / library / agent tool / internal-only), the audience (PR reviewer / team Slack / external customer), and the time budget. Also scaffolds a project-local demo skill for repos with recurring polished-capture needs. Use when: "make a demo", "generate demo", "record walkthrough", "launch video", "PR evidence", "upload screenshots", "demo artifacts", "make a video", "demo this feature", "create a walkthrough", "show what changed", "paste the output", "release notes blurb", "scaffold demo", "generate demo skill". Trigger: /demo.
Investigate, audit, triage, and fix. Systematic debugging, incident lifecycle, domain auditing, and issue logging. Four-phase protocol: root cause → pattern analysis → hypothesis test → fix. Use for: any bug, test failure, production incident, error spikes, audit, triage, postmortem, "diagnose", "why is this broken", "debug this", "production down", "is production ok", "audit stripe", "log issues". Trigger: /diagnose.
| name | code-review |
| description | Parallel multi-agent review for Laboratory changes. Prioritizes correctness, scientific validity, provenance, tests, and harness fit. Trigger: /code-review, /review, /critique. |
| argument-hint | [branch|diff|files] |
Review the diff as a Laboratory artifact. Findings lead; summaries are secondary. Block on bugs, invalid scientific claims, missing tests, broken simulate/live separation, missing trace/provenance, and runtime paths that were not exercised.
Default scope is git diff <base>...HEAD, where base is master unless the
user names another base. Include uncommitted changes when the user asks for a
working-tree review.
Classify touched surfaces:
Use fresh reviewers for substantive reviews:
Use Thinktank or cross-harness review when the diff is broad, high-risk, or touches experiment conclusions. Provider output is evidence, not authority; the lead synthesizes and verifies.
--simulate behavior and require explicit
--live for API calls..agents roots and bridge links.ship: no blocking findings and required executable paths were exercised.conditional: only clearly bounded follow-up remains and the user can accept
the risk.dont-ship: any correctness, scientific-validity, provenance, safety, or
unverified-runtime blocker remains.Return findings first, ordered by severity with file/line references. Then list open questions, commands or artifacts reviewed, and the verdict.