菜单
Use when CCDawn workflow needs a Chinese-first review of an entire repository, codebase, architecture, technical debt, test coverage, risk modules, maintainability, onboarding state, or project health before planning, refactoring, takeover, or prioritization.
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt，粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里，让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
基于 SOC 职业分类
Use when a user message needs Chinese-first intent inference, low-confidence collaborative clarification, routing, workflow weight control, skill choice, review/testing/planning/debugging/evaluation routing, proactive multi-thread collaboration or conflict coordination, continuation handling, execution permission inference, or protection from process over-escalation.
Use when active development or explicit refactoring has concrete code-structure risk: a source file is accumulating independently changing responsibilities, a class/component/function is hard to navigate or test, repeated changes touch distant sections, or the user asks to split a giant file; do not use for line count alone, generated/vendor/migration/schema/fixture files, or cohesive modules that remain easier to maintain together.
Use when the user explicitly enables an automated same-project multi-thread development loop that keeps peer Codex tasks progressing, recovers conflicts or stale coordination, integrates verified work into local main, and closes cleanup without repeated gates; do not use before opt-in, for one-off coordination, remote publication without permission, or subagent creation.
Use when existing independent Codex App threads work in the same project and need peer advice, collaboration proposals, shared progress awareness, ownership arbitration, conflict pause/resume, discussion, merge coordination, status exchange, or handoff through native thread tools without creating subagents.
Use when a verified or integrated software change has concrete temporary artifacts, generated noise, stale claims, merged local branches, or disposable worktrees to clean, or when the user explicitly asks to remove development residue or old branches.
Use when the user or project rules explicitly request project-local memory/dashboard initialization or updates, or when an existing `.docs/project-memory/` is needed for cross-session recovery, durable decisions, blockers, parallel-agent coordination, or formal handoff; do not auto-initialize or sync it for ordinary development.
| name | ccdawn-project-review |
| description | Use when CCDawn workflow needs a Chinese-first review of an entire repository, codebase, architecture, technical debt, test coverage, risk modules, maintainability, onboarding state, or project health before planning, refactoring, takeover, or prioritization. |
| license | MIT |
对整仓或明确子系统做只读、证据化审查，找出最影响完成率、误改率和用户价值的问题。PR/diff 使用 ccdawn-pr-review，具体 bug 使用 ccdawn-bug-review。
ccdawn-simplification-audit、ccdawn-planning、ccdawn-bug-review、ccdawn-performance-engineering、ccdawn-pr-review、ccdawn-brt 或 BLOCKED。ccdawn-brt 或更具体 owner，复合任务不吞其他 owner。下一步建议: <一个具体动作>。QUICK：目录、README、配置、测试入口和近期 git 信号。STANDARD：默认；增加关键链路、依赖、CI、测试质量和边界。DEEP：接手、重构或高风险发布前；增加热点历史、状态/数据/权限/迁移风险。不要为了全面扫描全仓。先确认事实源和高信号入口，再沿用户目标钻取 owning modules；证据足以回答审查目标时停止。按需检查架构边界、修改热点、真实行为测试、配置/数据/权限、发布回滚和接续成本，不为未命中的通用清单继续扩读。
严重度：P0 数据/安全/核心不可用；P1 高风险缺陷或关键契约/测试缺口；P2 明显增加误改和维护成本；P3 非阻塞改进。
每条必须包含：位置或命令证据、具体观察、影响、最小有效动作、验证条件。不得把“项目复杂”“测试不足”“TODO 很多”直接当 finding；孤立实现 bug 不升级为项目 finding，除非证据表明它代表重复模式、架构边界或系统性风险。
Telemetry Gap 与已确认问题分开；WATCHLIST 必须写明升级、降级或关闭所需的日志、指标、测试或时间窗口。
多个 finding 按依赖、用户价值、误改风险和验证成本排序，而不是只推荐一个：
SAFE_DIRECT：已有修复许可时依次执行并验证，不逐项询问。PLAN_THEN_EXECUTE：存在设计分叉时先规划，再回到执行。DEFERRED：只记录触发条件。BLOCKED：停止并问一个不可约问题。只有顺序会改变产品取舍、范围或高风险动作时才让用户选择。只读审查请求本轮停在报告；用户说“继续/开始修复/按顺序修”时从第一个非 Deferred/Blocked 项连续推进。
项目审查: HEALTHY / WATCHLIST / NEEDS_ATTENTION / HIGH_RISK / BLOCKED
范围与关键证据: ...
Findings:
- P0/P1/P2/P3 [位置] 问题；影响；最小动作；验证条件
执行顺序（仅多个后续动作时）:
1. <动作> [SAFE_DIRECT/PLAN_THEN_EXECUTE/DEFERRED/BLOCKED]
证据缺口与剩余风险: ...
下一步建议: <一个具体动作>
没有 finding 时明确说明未发现结构性问题，并用一句话说明最重要的未覆盖边界。不默认生成项目地图、矩阵、ledger、完整扫描清单或专项路由清单。