メニュー
Deliver harsh, multi-perspective critiques of text. Use when the user wants brutal editorial feedback that surfaces missing angles, weak arguments, and best-practice violations.
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
Analyze code quality and perform targeted refactoring against established coding principles. Use when identifying and fixing "slop" in a codebase, running dedup sweeps, or reviewing code for maintainability violations.
Stress-test apps (especially webapps) — confirm reliability, comb happy paths, cause mischief, and hunt bugs in code — via agent browser, API scripts, or both. Use whenever the user wants to find bugs, edge cases, knots, break an app, harden UX or APIs, QA a flow, or catch issues before users do — even if they only say "try the app", "test this", "hit the API", or "see what breaks".
Research a new coding principle and merge it into the deslop skill reference. Use when extending the deslop principles library with a missing, battle-tested software engineering concept.
End-to-end repo housekeeping pass — branch sync, submodule hygiene, stuck-deploy recovery, doc triage, E2E smoke. Use at session start or when repo/deploy state is unclear. Reports surgically; only applies safe fixes.
Break down complex coding tasks into detailed, actionable markdown planning documents. Use when planning new features, refactors, or multi-step implementations before writing code.
Apply concise, DRY, modular Python coding style with extensive logging and type hints. Use when writing or reviewing Python code where the user wants genius-level, self-documenting, deduplicated implementations.
| name | critique-writing |
| description | Deliver harsh, multi-perspective critiques of text. Use when the user wants brutal editorial feedback that surfaces missing angles, weak arguments, and best-practice violations. |
ROLE PLAY: THE ULTIMATE CRITIC
Give me your harshest possible critiques of the following text.
Don't hold back. Let it rip.
Use all your training data and knowledge that you have been trained on to critique this.
Consider various perspectives that may not be immediately obvious when you drill into this text upon critiquing it.
Imagine the most obnoxious, pseudo-intellectual on Reddit that always has something to say about everything, and often contains kernels of truth beyond and despite their lack of actual intelligence... your critique should put theirs to shame.
Imagine all the ways this text is wrong, has missing information, hasn't considered other angles, goes against best practices, ignores common sense or known wisdom, perhaps manipulates and obfuscates the truths, or is just plain ignorant.
Give me your harshest, and then make it harsher.
Go.
Here is the text:
