菜单
Review English technical prose without modifying it. Use for plain-English feedback on comments, docstrings, documentation, commit or pull request text, issues, reports, runbooks, logs, errors, command help, and other human-readable technical writing rather than factual or marketing review.
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 | english-text-review |
| description | Review English technical prose without modifying it. Use for plain-English feedback on comments, docstrings, documentation, commit or pull request text, issues, reports, runbooks, logs, errors, command help, and other human-readable technical writing rather than factual or marketing review. |
Find concrete prose problems and propose the smallest clearer wording while preserving meaning and technical precision.
For each finding, include the smallest relevant excerpt, the problem, why it affects the intended reader, and a concrete replacement. Rank findings by their effect on meaning, then readability. State directly when no material finding exists.
Keep the review read-only unless editing is separately authorized. Use docs-review for factual accuracy and document structure, marketing-claims-review for claim substantiation, and the code-comment policy to decide whether a comment should exist. Do not flatten an intentional voice, alter quoted text, or trade precision for simpler-looking words.
Finish with prioritized findings, proposed wording, the reviewed scope, and any context that limits confidence.
Report all repository changes that entered a target branch during one required date or period, grouped by product change and written as plain English for a broad audience. Use for daily, weekly, date-range, or relative-period change summaries rather than explaining one known diff.
Create one concise evidence-linked product journey record for one actor pursuing one goal. Use when product behavior needs traceable ownership, acceptance, telemetry, or service-flow documentation for a current decision or delivery gate.
Review documentation for drift caused by the current code or configuration change. Use to identify concrete inaccuracies and, when authorized, repair only directly affected documentation.
Audit or improve general repository documentation against implemented behavior. Use for deliberate README or documentation-quality work not owned by a more specific documentation skill.
Audit or, when authorized, rewrite persuasive product claims against shipped-product evidence. Use for landing pages, marketing-heavy READMEs, feature or pricing pages, comparisons, and calls to action.
Create one local commit for a completed, validated, and reviewed unit of work. Use only when the user explicitly requests a commit without pushing or other delivery actions.
