Results for “review-gates”

Distills the current conversation or a plain-language prompt into a production-ready, self-healing Claude Code skill with pre-flight checks, validation gates, self-review, and learnings capture.

Audit database schema for consistency, validation, and industry standards. Use when reviewing schema design, naming conventions, constraints, indexes, or migrations. Destructive-op gates → plan-data-integrity. Who-can-read-what RLS → plan-rls-audit. Restore/RPO → plan-backup-dr.

Full-novel craft + anti-slop pipeline with project mode (ledger, characters, foreshadow, worldbuilding bible), draft→review→revise gates, and stability-trap enforcement at scene/chapter/manuscript scale. Single-scene mode retained. Use for fiction, lore, character docs, dialogue, worldbuilding, or book projects.

Use when asked to fix, build, refactor, review, verify, or release software and the work is non-trivial — including delivering a change request (issue, ticket, or request) from intake through planning, gates, implementation, review, verified PR, and authorized post-merge release. neckbeard routes the change through framing, discovery, design, implementation, review, verification, delivery, and learning — choosing the smallest *safe* intervention, proving it at the real delivery boundary, and leaving an inspectable evidence ledger. For change-request / issue-to-PR work, conditionally loads a 9-phase journey with gates, delivery packet, and lifecycle integration. Composes specialist catalog skills rather than replacing them. Not a persona, not a '10x developer' prompt, not a LOC-minimizer. The journey is not loaded for plain fixes, refactors, or reviews that lack an issue/ticket trajectory.

Orchestrates the full academic research pipeline (research, write, integrity check, review, revise, re-review, re-revise, final integrity check, finalize), coordinating alterlab-deep-research, alterlab-paper-writer, and alterlab-paper-reviewer into a seamless 10-stage workflow with mandatory integrity verification, two-stage peer review, and reproducible quality gates. Use when the request mentions academic pipeline, research to paper, full paper workflow, paper pipeline, end-to-end paper, research-to-publication, or complete paper workflow. Part of the AlterLab Academic Skills suite.

Design and implement clear, modular, resilient software and create executor-grade implementation plans with explicit scope, drift checks, verification gates, tests, STOP conditions, dependencies, and delegated-work review. Use for development, refactoring, architecture, implementation planning, safe migrations, handoffs to another engineer or agent, or verifying delegated code changes.

Design and verify auditable human oversight, approval gates, escalation paths, and safe state transitions for AI agent workflows. Use when deciding which agent actions require review, adding approve/reject or dual-control flows, preventing unauthorized autonomous effects, creating decision records, reducing rubber-stamping, or recovering safely from rejected, expired, or failed actions.

Design and apply QA methodology for software teams: test strategy, regression testing, CI failure triage, test automation, quality gates and metrics, risk-based testing, exploratory testing, test design techniques, AI code quality gates (independent verification, acceptance-criteria testability review for agentic Spec-Driven Development), mutation-guided test hardening and review evidence (surviving mutants, weak assertions, diff-aware mutation testing), agentic eval design (dataset test design, judge-as-system-under-test, flaky-eval discipline), QA career levels (Senior/Staff/Principal), and SDET engineering (test infrastructure, gTAA, CI/CD integration). Do not use for root-cause debugging of production incidents, security implementation or threat modeling, or evaluation framework governance and statistical analysis — route those to systematic-debugging, secure-software-engineering, and agent-evals-and-observability respectively.

Audits natural-language programming artifacts such as SKILL.md, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, slash commands, plugin manifests, hooks, rules, and prompt files. Use when reviewing AI-agent repositories, checking manifest-vs-disk consistency, scoring skill or agent quality, adding NL artifact CI gates, or diagnosing vocabulary and version drift across Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Gemini, and Antigravity-style projects.

Audit, write, or revise Architecture Decision Records (ADRs), including the decision of whether one is warranted. Use when an architecturally significant decision needs recording, when reviewing an existing ADR collection, or when adding ADRs to a project that has none. Detects existing template (Nygard or MADR) and defaults to Nygard for new repos. Gates comparison ADRs through a decompose-and-verify interview before drafting.

Single entrypoint for taw-kit. User types `/taw <anything in VN or EN>` — this skill classifies the intent (BUILD / FIX / SHIP / MAINTAIN / ADVISOR) and loads the matching branch file to execute. Replaces the old one-command-per-task model (/taw-new, /taw-add, /taw-fix, /taw-deploy, /taw-security) with a single unified command. Supports dev workflows out of the box: test, upgrade, clean, perf, rollback, refactor, types, seed, review, stack-swap, status, and ADVISOR group (analyze, suggest, coverage, adversarial, scope-check) for opinionated review of existing code. User-visible strings match the user's input language (Vietnamese by default for VN users). Two modes: SAFE (default — clarify + approval, max 1 round-trip) and YOLO (skip gates, smart defaults — for demos/power users). YOLO triggers: prose contains `yolo`, `nhanh nha`, `lam luon`, `khoi hoi`, `auto`, or args start with `yolo`. Trigger phrases (EN + VN) — broad match so user can keep typing plain prose without re-invoking /taw every turn. Grouped by

Creates decision-focused PRDs and product specs — the kind that make explicit decisions, not document hopes. Make sure to use this skill whenever someone asks to write, review, draft, or improve any product document, including PRDs, feature specs, requirements docs, or product specifications. Trigger even when the user doesn't say "PRD" explicitly — phrases like "write a spec for X", "define requirements for Y", "what should my PRD include", "help me document this feature", or "my spec feels too vague" all apply. Do not attempt to write the PRD directly without consulting this skill. Produces 5-stage PRDs with behavior contracts (15-25 labeled examples for AI features), measurable success metrics with specific thresholds, precise rollout plans with percentages and ramp gates, and antipattern detection. Works for AI features, SaaS, mobile apps, and traditional software.