菜单
Merge Slang clarity review candidate files and resolve overlapping, duplicate, or superseded comments. Use after high-level and fine-grained clarity review passes and before scope filtering or GitHub posting. Produces or updates one canonical candidate markdown file.
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
| name | slang-review-consolidate-candidates |
| description | Merge Slang clarity review candidate files and resolve overlapping, duplicate, or superseded comments. Use after high-level and fine-grained clarity review passes and before scope filtering or GitHub posting. Produces or updates one canonical candidate markdown file. |
| argument-hint | <candidate-markdown> [more-candidate-markdown...] |
| allowed-tools | ["Bash","Read","Grep","Glob","Write","Edit"] |
Merge clarity-review candidates into one canonical markdown file and resolve overlap before scope filtering.
Prefer one canonical file after raw generation:
tmp/review-candidates/pr-<number>-clarity-workflow.md
If given multiple raw candidate files, create or overwrite the canonical file by copying their candidate entries in source order. If given one canonical file, update it in place.
Do not post comments.
Read:
slang-review-clarity and
slang-review-fine-grained-clarity.tmp/pr-diff.patch and tmp/pr-files.txt, or the equivalent PR diff and file list.Preserve candidate IDs such as C001 and FG014. Add or update:
- Overlap decision: Keep | Duplicate of <id> | Superseded by <id> | Merged into <id> | Needs judgment call
- Overlap rationale: <one sentence>
Every candidate must receive overlap metadata, including candidates kept without changes. Use
Overlap decision: Keep for candidates that do not overlap another candidate.
For duplicates, superseded candidates, and candidates merged into another comment, set or update:
- Status: Drop
When merging two candidates, revise the retained candidate's proposed comment so it covers the best version of the concern. Do not include candidate IDs or process metadata in the proposed comment text.
Treat candidates as overlapping when they point at the same line range, nearby lines in the same function/type/section, or the same conceptual clarity problem.
Drop a candidate as a duplicate when it asks for the same clarification at the same conceptual level as another candidate. Prefer the clearer, more actionable, better-scoped comment.
Mark a fine-grained candidate as superseded when a high-level candidate asks for enough restructuring, recasting, or contract explanation that the fine-grained code may no longer exist after the high-level concern is addressed.
Merge candidates when each has part of the same concern and one combined comment would be clearer than multiple separate comments.
Keep overlapping candidates separate when they identify genuinely different problems, such as a high-level missing invariant and a separate local naming contradiction.
Use Needs judgment call when overlap depends on author intent, likely implementation
strategy, or whether a broader rewrite will happen. This does not mean the workflow must stop
for a human; it means the judgment-call resolution pass should spend focused analysis before
posting.
Prefer moving dropped, duplicate, superseded, and merged candidates to a later ## Dropped
section in the same file. Preserve enough text for auditability and to avoid reintroducing a
previously rejected comment.
Incrementally refresh the LLM-generated design docs under docs/generated/design/. Use when the user asks to update, refresh, or regenerate the generated design documentation after source changes. Runs the three-stage operator loop defined in docs/generated/design/_meta/regenerate.md - (1) regenerate stale docs (Claude), (2) direct the user to run the non-Claude review, (3) apply remediation (Claude) - with explicit confirmation before stages 1 and 3.
Review Slang changes for high-level clarity. Use whenever reviewing PRs or diffs for code quality or correctness. Produces candidate review comments in a markdown file.
Run the full Slang clarity review workflow: generate high-level and fine-grained candidates, consolidate overlap, filter for PR-author scope, and optionally post one GitHub PR review. Use when asked to perform an end-to-end clarity-focused review.
Review Slang changes for fine-grained clarity. Use whenever reviewing PRs or diffs for code quality or correctness. Produces candidate review comments in a markdown file.
Post filtered Slang clarity review candidates as one proper GitHub PR review. Use after candidate consolidation and scope filtering. Uses the bundled stdlib Python script to validate candidate formatting, map comments to PR diff lines, and submit a GitHub review through gh.
Resolve Slang clarity review candidates marked as needing a judgment call. Use after consolidation and scope filtering, before posting, to perform focused follow-up analysis and decide whether uncertain candidates should be kept, revised, or dropped.