소스 정보
- 저장소
- majiayu000/claude-skill-registry
- 최근 소스 활동
- 2026년 6월 23일 12:15
- 감지된 SKILL.md 언어
- 영어
- 스타
- 543
- 포크
- 85
설치 방법
기본적으로 소스를 먼저 확인하는 Prompt가 선택됩니다. 직접 명령으로 전환하거나 로컬 사본을 다운로드할 수도 있습니다.
소스 파일 검토
설치 여부를 결정하기 전에 SKILL.md와 SkillsMP에 표시된 보조 파일을 읽어 보세요.
메뉴
기본적으로 소스를 먼저 확인하는 Prompt가 선택됩니다. 직접 명령으로 전환하거나 로컬 사본을 다운로드할 수도 있습니다.
설치 여부를 결정하기 전에 SKILL.md와 SkillsMP에 표시된 보조 파일을 읽어 보세요.
Codex 또는 Claude로 설치 이 Prompt를 복사해 Codex, Claude 또는 다른 어시스턴트에 붙여 넣으면 Skill 페이지를 검토하고 설치를 진행할 수 있습니다.
직접 명령은 검토 Prompt를 거치지 않습니다. 실행하기 전에 소스를 확인하세요.
npx skills add https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry --skill call-gemini명령은 한 줄로 유지됩니다. 복사하기 전에 가로로 스크롤해 전체 내용을 확인하세요.
로컬 사본을 원하시나요? SkillsMP에서 현재 제공할 수 있는 파일을 다운로드하세요.
LLM token logprobs and calibration. Per-decision confidence, ECE, Brier, reliability diagrams, low-confidence triage.
Analyze LLM token logprobs and calibration. Use for per-decision confidence, ECE, Brier scores, reliability diagrams, and low-confidence triage.
回顾最近 N 天的 Claude Code 使用记录——扫描原始会话数据,按主题分组汇总"我都做了什么",并从个人操作系统视角输出模式、风险与增删建议。当用户说 /recap、"看看我这几天做了什么"、"回顾一下我最近的会话"、"这两天我用 claude 干了啥"、"活动回顾" 时使用。
SOC 직업 분류 기준
SKILL.md 표시 중
| name | call-gemini |
| description | Invoke the Gemini CLI for architecture and scalability review. |
| version | 1.1.0 |
| tags | ["gemini","architecture","review","validation"] |
| owner | orchestration |
| status | active |
Wrapper for invoking Gemini agent via CLI for architecture and scalability review.
Gemini is specialized for:
gemini CLI installed and accessible on PATH./call-gemini
| Area | Weight | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture | 0.7 | Design patterns, modularity |
| Scalability | 0.8 | Performance at scale, bottlenecks |
| Patterns | 0.6 | Design patterns, anti-patterns |
gemini --yolo "<prompt>"
| Flag | Purpose |
|---|---|
--yolo | Auto-approve tool calls (required for non-interactive) |
--model | Select model (optional, default: gemini-2.0-flash) |
IMPORTANT:
--output-formatgemini --yolo "
You are reviewing an implementation plan for architecture and scalability.
Read the plan JSON provided by the orchestrator (phase_outputs export).
Evaluate for:
1. Architecture patterns - Are they appropriate for the use case?
2. Modularity - Is the design properly decomposed?
3. Scalability - Will this scale with increased load?
4. Maintainability - Is the code easy to maintain and extend?
5. Technical debt - Does this introduce unnecessary complexity?
6. Design principles - SOLID, DRY, KISS compliance
Return your assessment as JSON (wrap in code block):
\`\`\`json
{
\"agent\": \"gemini\",
\"phase\": \"validation\",
\"approved\": true|false,
\"score\": 1-10,
\"assessment\": \"Brief summary of your review\",
\"architecture_review\": {
\"patterns_identified\": [\"List of patterns found\"],
\"patterns_recommended\": [\"Patterns that should be used\"],
\"anti_patterns\": [\"Any anti-patterns detected\"]
},
\"concerns\": [
{
\"area\": \"architecture|scalability|maintainability\",
\"severity\": \"high|medium|low\",
\"description\": \"Specific concern\",
\"recommendation\": \"How to address it\"
}
],
\"blocking_issues\": [\"Issues that MUST be fixed\"],
\"strengths\": [\"Positive aspects of the design\"]
}
\`\`\`
Focus on design quality. Only block for fundamental architecture flaws.
"
gemini --yolo "
You are performing an architecture-focused code review of recently implemented changes.
Review the implementation for:
1. Architecture compliance - Does code match the plan?
2. Design pattern correctness - Are patterns implemented correctly?
3. Separation of concerns - Is responsibility properly divided?
4. Coupling and cohesion - Are modules appropriately connected?
5. Extensibility - Can this be easily extended?
6. Performance implications - Any obvious bottlenecks?
Also check:
- Code organization and structure
- Naming conventions and clarity
- Documentation adequacy
- Error handling patterns
- Resource management
Return your assessment as JSON (wrap in code block):
\`\`\`json
{
\"agent\": \"gemini\",
\"phase\": \"verification\",
\"approved\": true|false,
\"score\": 1-10,
\"assessment\": \"Brief summary of code review\",
\"architecture_compliance\": {
\"matches_plan\": true|false,
\"deviations\": [\"Any deviations from plan\"]
},
\"issues\": [
{
\"file\": \"path/to/file.py\",
\"concern\": \"What's the issue\",
\"severity\": \"high|medium|low\",
\"category\": \"architecture|scalability|maintainability\",
\"recommendation\": \"How to improve\"
}
],
\"blocking_issues\": [\"Critical architecture issues\"],
\"quality_score\": {
\"modularity\": 1-10,
\"extensibility\": 1-10,
\"maintainability\": 1-10
}
}
\`\`\`
Be constructive. Focus on significant architecture concerns, not style nitpicks.
"
Gemini returns markdown with embedded JSON. Parse with:
import re
import json
# Extract JSON from code block
match = re.search(r'```json\s*(.*?)\s*```', gemini_output, re.DOTALL)
if match:
result = json.loads(match.group(1))
else:
# Try to find raw JSON
match = re.search(r'\{.*\}', gemini_output, re.DOTALL)
if match:
result = json.loads(match.group(0))
logs with type escalation or blockerPhase 2 (Validation):
phase_outputs as gemini_feedbackPhase 4 (Verification):
phase_outputs as gemini_review| Phase | Min Score | Blocking Issues |
|---|---|---|
| Validation | 6.0 | None allowed |
| Verification | 7.0 | None allowed |
# From project directory
cd projects/my-app
# Run validation
gemini --yolo "Review the plan JSON provided in this prompt for architecture..."
# Parse the output (may need to extract JSON from markdown)
cat gemini-output.txt
When Gemini disagrees with Cursor:
| Issue Type | Resolution |
|---|---|
| Architecture concern | Gemini wins (weight 0.7) |
| Security concern | Cursor wins (weight 0.8) |
| Code quality | Average scores |
| Both blocking | Human escalation |
# Use specific model
gemini --model gemini-2.0-flash --yolo "prompt"
# Available models
# - gemini-2.0-flash (default, fastest)
# - gemini-2.0-pro (more thorough)
/validate - Plan validation workflow/verify - Code review workflow/resolve-conflict - Merge Cursor and Gemini feedback