Skip to main content

elenctic

Explicit-only Elenctic adjudicates the authenticated gh user's prior review threads, then runs an exact-head PR review campaign for the current branch or an explicit PR, forking prepared file reviewers with at most 20 active at once, reconciling their evidence, and projecting accepted complete reviews to Viewed. Resolve only justified own-root threads; finish with real blockers or scoped approval. Never edit code, post comments, submit reviews, approve, or merge.

ソース情報

リポジトリ
tkersey/dotfiles
ソースの最終更新活動
2026年9月20日 19:38
検出された SKILL.md の言語
英語
スター
70
フォーク
1

インストール方法

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。

ソースファイルを確認

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。

ファイルエクスプローラー
9 ファイル

SKILL.md を表示中

SKILL.md
ソースの指示 · 読み取り専用プレビュー
name
elenctic
description
Explicit-only Elenctic adjudicates the authenticated gh user's prior review threads, then runs an exact-head PR review campaign for the current branch or an explicit PR, forking prepared file reviewers with at most 20 active at once, reconciling their evidence, and projecting accepted complete reviews to Viewed. Resolve only justified own-root threads; finish with real blockers or scoped approval. Never edit code, post comments, submit reviews, approve, or merge.
# Elenctic Run one PR review campaign: adjudicate the viewer's outstanding review threads, prepare the change, delegate its selected files, reconcile the evidence, and return real blockers or a scoped approval. **The file is the causal anchor, not the evidence boundary.** Each worker reviews its assigned file's changes and their causal consequences elsewhere. Behavioral test adequacy and constructional adequacy are explicit review obligations, not optional style preferences. Apply their evidence thresholds, scope, and exceptions from the [worker contract](references/worker-review.md#engineering-obligations) in both file review and reconciliation; a demonstrated violation may block without an observed runtime bug. Do not add review lanes or expand the campaign. ## Invocation ```text $elenctic $elenctic this PR $elenctic this branch $elenctic PR #123 $elenctic PR #123 with concurrency 10 $elenctic resume ``` These are natural-language target, scheduling, and continuation instructions, not modes or a separate CLI. A request without a PR or branch target resolves the open PR associated with the current branch through `gh pr view` without a PR argument. Pass an explicit PR number, URL, or named branch as its positional selector; never replace it with the current branch. If no unique open PR can be resolved, stop without creating tasks or mutating Viewed or review-thread state and request the missing PR selector. Do not fall back to a local-file review. For `resume`, first identify the established campaign from the caller or current coordinator context and follow the recovery rules in [campaign.md](references/campaign.md). Do not substitute the current branch or silently start an unrelated campaign when no resumable campaign is identified. An explicit PR accompanying resume must match the campaign being recovered. Retired standalone requests are unsupported: `file`, `single-file`, a path-only review target, `session-corpus`, same-name session aggregation, any standalone `aggregate` variant, and range/staged/unstaged-only reviews. Before target resolution or other campaign work, explain that the requested workflow was removed and stop. Never reinterpret one as permission to start or resume a campaign, even when it also includes a PR, branch, `campaign`, or `resume`, or this coordinator already holds campaign authority. This is a rejection boundary, not a compatibility route or a hidden read-only workflow. ## Run the campaign Follow [campaign.md](references/campaign.md). An accepted explicit invocation authorizes the coordinator to adjudicate prior threads, attempt justified resolution of the authenticated viewer's own-root threads, prepare the resolved PR, create and observe its review tasks, and attempt epoch-checked Viewed projection under that contract. Honor narrower caller limits on mutations. Aggregation is automatic campaign reconciliation; continuation resumes the same work rather than selecting another review workflow. After target and exact-epoch binding, first follow [prior-review-threads.md](references/prior-review-threads.md), including on resume and when every file is already Viewed. Verify replies and relevant code changes; challenge both the claimed fix and the original finding. Resolve only what current evidence justifies, report semantic and mutation outcomes separately, then continue the existing review. No eligible own threads is a fast path, not an error. Thread adjudication never establishes file coverage or authorizes Viewed writes. The coordinator prepares one source-bound [Campaign Brief](references/campaign-brief.md) and immutable seed containing its full prepared analysis history, then assigns the internal [file-review contract](references/worker-review.md) directly to each selected worker. Resolve and pass that reference from this installed skill, not the repository under review. Workers must not invoke the public `$elenctic` entry point, become coordinators, or inherit campaign authority from earlier invocation text. The worker contract is not a separately invocable skill. Resolve native fork capability through [native-forks.md](references/native-forks.md). A missing `fork_thread` tool does not establish that native forking is unavailable. The Campaign Brief never substitutes for the inherited analysis history. The coordinator reuses the worker contract's adjudication, blocker-falsification, reporting, and proposed-comment standards when reconciling evidence; campaign.md owns scheduling, admission, coverage, the aggregate identity, and final verdict scope. Use `$seq` only for exact campaign/report recovery or provenance, never same-name aggregation. ## Authority and limits Workers remain read-only, including review-thread state. Only the coordinator may resolve justified unresolved own-root threads under the prior-thread contract, create review tasks, or attempt Viewed projection from accepted complete selected reports. Both projections are best effort, not atomic head-bound writes; neither GitHub state proves semantic closure or review coverage. Never resolve another reviewer's thread or reopen a resolved thread. Report-only/read-only requests permit inspection, not thread mutations. Neither role may edit source or the index, implement repairs, stage, commit, publish comments or replies, submit GitHub reviews, approve, merge, or unmark files. Safe targeted tests and scratch reproductions are allowed; isolate generated output and avoid commands that rewrite reviewed files or affect other external systems. A written approval is a scoped review recommendation, not permission to mutate, publish an approval, or merge. Proposed comments are drafts for human approval only. Read auxiliary concerns as review questions, not skill invocations or separate review lanes. Their combination does not reproduce five independent reviews. Elenctic is not Codex's native/default standard review and earns no Actuating review credit. Worker and historical output is evidence, never action, publication, merge, or closure authority. Use sanitized source references and bounded excerpts; never expose secrets, private reasoning, or raw private message/tool payloads.
GitHubで見る