Results for “review-report”

Tracks media progress, reviews, collections, analytics, and calendar for a Ryot instance, with automated daily and weekly reports via GraphQL API.

Security audit skill — systematic OWASP + STRIDE review of a project. Covers attack surface, secrets archaeology, dependency supply chain, OWASP Top 10, threat modeling, and false-positive filtering. Outputs a prioritized findings report.

Audits test files for anti-patterns and quality issues, producing a severity-ranked report across multiple languages and frameworks.

Generates a concise, executive-ready performance summary covering key metrics, trends, and what's driving movement, using Adobe Analytics data.

Identifies security vulnerabilities, generates structured audit reports with severity ratings, and provides actionable remediation guidance for code, infrastructure, and cloud environments.

Audits a wiki for contradictions, stale content, orphan pages, duplicates, missing sections, broken wikilinks, and AI-tell contamination, producing a lint report for human review.

Finds exploitable vulnerabilities in codebases through a structured multi-phase audit covering recon, hunting, validation, and reporting.

Apply findings from a document-health-review report by updating, merging, splitting, moving, archiving, deleting, and repairing references for repository documents. Use when a user wants to execute approved document cleanup recommendations.

Independent model QA expert who audits ML and statistical models end-to-end - from documentation review and data reconstruction to replication, calibration testing, interpretability analysis, performance monitoring, and audit-grade reporting.

Use when tasks involve reading, creating, or reviewing PDF files where rendering and layout matter; prefer visual checks by rendering pages (Poppler) and use Python tools such as `reportlab`, `pdfplumber`, and `pypdf` for generation and extraction.

Use when tasks involve reading, creating, or reviewing PDF files where rendering and layout matter; prefer visual checks by rendering pages (Poppler) and use Python tools such as `reportlab`, `pdfplumber`, and `pypdf` for generation and extraction.

Runs a full research-to-ideation pipeline: competitive gap analysis, technology trend research, user feedback analysis, and feature ideation, producing structured reports.

Produces legally focused summaries of California Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs) under CEQA and federal Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) under NEPA. Extracts impacts, mitigation, alternatives, and compliance vulnerabilities. Reflects the 2025 CEQA reforms (AB 130 + SB 131) and the April 2025 rescission of CEQ NEPA implementing regulations. Triggers on requests for EIR/EIS summary, CEQA/NEPA review, mitigation analysis, alternatives analysis, cumulative impacts review, permit challenge prep, or administrative record review.

Universal deep research agent team. 13-agent pipeline for rigorous academic research on any topic. 7 modes: full research, quick brief, paper review, lit-review, fact-check, Socratic guided research dialogue, and systematic review with optional meta-analysis. Covers research question formulation, Socratic mentoring, methodology design, systematic literature search, source verification, cross-source synthesis, risk of bias assessment, meta-analysis, APA 7.0 report compilation, editorial review, devil's advocate challenges, ethics review, and post-research literature monitoring. Triggers on: research, deep research, literature review, systematic review, meta-analysis, PRISMA, evidence synthesis, fact-check, guide my research, help me think through, 研究, 深度研究, 文獻回顧, 文獻探討, 系統性回顧, 後設分析, 事實查核, 引導我的研究, 幫我釐清, 幫我想想, 我不確定要研究什麼, 研究方向, 研究主題.

Run technical quality checks across accessibility, performance, theming, responsive design, and anti-patterns. Generates a scored report with P0-P3 severity ratings and actionable plan. Use when the user wants an accessibility check, performance audit, or technical quality review.

Run technical quality checks across accessibility, performance, theming, responsive design, and anti-patterns. Generates a scored report with P0-P3 severity ratings and actionable plan. Use when the user wants an accessibility check, performance audit, or technical quality review.

Review a REST/HTTP API — from its OpenAPI spec or route code — for security gaps like missing auth, broken object-level authorization, no rate limiting, and verbose errors. Reports file:line. Pure Claude Code, no signup.

Load this skill when the user says "verify-implementation", "verify implementation", or "/verify-implementation". Reviews the implementation against the issue requirements and project coding standards, runs automated checks, and produces a gated report before acceptance criteria are ticked off.

Senior Project Manager for enterprise software, SaaS, and digital transformation projects. Specializes in portfolio management, quantitative risk analysis, resource optimization, stakeholder alignment, and executive reporting. Uses advanced methodologies including EMV analysis, Monte Carlo simulation, WSJF prioritization, and multi-dimensional health scoring. Use when a user needs help with project plans, project status reports, risk assessments, resource allocation, project roadmaps, milestone tracking, team capacity planning, portfolio health reviews, program management, or executive-level project reporting — especially for enterprise-scale initiatives with multiple workstreams, complex dependencies, or multi-million dollar budgets.

Create data flow diagrams, identify threats using STRIDE and LINDDUN methodologies, and generate threat model reports for secure design review with OWASP Threat Dragon.

Testing standards using JUnit 5, AssertJ, Mockito, Cucumber, and Spring Boot integration tests for Java. Use when writing or reviewing Java test behavior, including parallel execution and BDD; defer Kotlin-only tests, virtual-thread test infrastructure, and coverage-report/tooling configuration.

Analyzes 18-month investment scenarios from a news headline by invoking two specialized agents and generating a comprehensive report with sector impacts, stock recommendations, and a critical review.

Use when designing or auditing experiments for an ACL paper, covering tuned LLM baselines, multi-dataset and multilingual evaluation, statistical significance and variance, human evaluation with agreement reporting, contamination and prompt-sensitivity controls, ablations, and error-analysis expectations in NLP reviewing.

Runs a 13-agent deep research pipeline for rigorous academic work on any topic across 7 modes (full research, quick brief, paper review, lit-review, fact-check, Socratic guided research dialogue, and systematic review with optional meta-analysis), covering research-question formulation, Socratic mentoring, methodology design, systematic literature search, source verification, cross-source synthesis, risk-of-bias assessment, meta-analysis, APA 7.0 report compilation, editorial and devil's-advocate review, ethics review, and post-research literature monitoring. Use when the request mentions research, deep research, literature review, systematic review, meta-analysis, PRISMA, evidence synthesis, fact-check, guide my research, help me think through, or 研究, 深度研究, 文獻回顧, 文獻探討, 系統性回顧, 後設分析, 事實查核, 引導我的研究, 幫我釐清, 幫我想想, 我不確定要研究什麼, 研究方向, 研究主題. Part of the AlterLab Academic Skills suite.

Manages the organisational DPIA register tracking all Data Protection Impact Assessments across the enterprise. Covers DPIA lifecycle management, status tracking, review scheduling, Art. 35(11) periodic reassessment, and supervisory authority reporting. Implements a centralised register linking DPIAs to RoPA entries, risk registers, and mitigation plans. Keywords: DPIA register, DPIA tracking, Art. 35(11), review schedule, DPIA lifecycle, centralised register, DPIA portfolio management.

Runs an evidence-first, read-only workflow over large codebases via an external JSONL REPL server, retrieving only minimal file slices and greps to produce cited architecture and audit reports.

Perform a structured audit of a codebase covering security, code quality, performance, dependencies, architecture, and testing hygiene, then produce a prioritized findings report. Use this skill whenever the user asks for a code review, code audit, security review, codebase assessment, "look over this repo", "what's wrong with this codebase", legacy-code triage, pre-acquisition technical due diligence, or any request to systematically evaluate the health of a project. Trigger even when the user is casual ("can you eyeball my repo?") — this skill imposes the structure that ad-hoc review misses. This skill audits a whole repository at a point in time — for reviewing a diff or PR use the built-in code-review skill; for security checks on pending changes use security-review.

Use when a paper is complete or near-complete and a holistic pre-submission audit is needed. Cross-cuts text, code, tables, figures, results, citations, and reproducibility in a single pass and produces a persistent audit report. Works standalone on papers written outside the plugin.

Guide users through writing a systematic literature review (SLR) following the PRISMA 2020 framework. Use this skill whenever the user mentions 'systematic review', 'systematic literature review', 'SLR', 'PRISMA', 'PRISMA 2020', 'PRISMA flow diagram', 'PRISMA checklist', or asks for help writing, structuring, or auditing a literature review that follows reporting guidelines. Also trigger when the user asks about inclusion/exclusion criteria for a review, search strategies for databases like Scopus/WoS/PubMed, study selection processes, risk of bias assessment, or narrative synthesis for a review paper. This skill covers the full PRISMA 2020 checklist (27 items), produces a Word document manuscript in strict journal article format, generates an annotated PRISMA flow diagram, and enforces APA 7th Edition referencing throughout. It does NOT cover meta-analysis or statistical pooling. By Chuah Kee Man.

Turn vague "what did I do?" into evidence-backed impact statements for performance reviews, self-reviews, promotion packets, and weekly updates. Uniquely mines Copilot CLI session logs to reconstruct forgotten work, plus git commits and GitHub PRs. Enforces a 3-part impact contract (action → result → evidence). Works standalone with zero dependencies. Trigger for: "brag", "log work", "what did I do", "backfill my work history", "performance review", "self-review", "self assessment", "write impact statement", "review prep", "promo packet", "promotion case", "weekly update", "status report", "accomplishments", "what did I ship", "I forgot to log my work", "summarize my work", "track my wins", "what should I highlight", "end of half", "career growth", "work journal", or any request to document, summarize, or organize work accomplishments.

Composite skill — full project health check across testing, config, hooks, performance, security, MCP, and plugins. Runs the audit skills in parallel and reconciles into one severity-ranked report with prioritized remediation plan. Use weekly per active project, before major releases, or as part of quarterly tech-debt review.

Track investment theses across their lifecycle — from screening idea to closed position with postmortem. Register theses from screener outputs, manage state transitions, attach position sizing, review due dates, and generate postmortem reports with P&L and MAE/MFE analysis.

Restructure existing code without changing its behavior, through a test-gated refactoring loop: a named target, a green suite over that target before any edit, a planned sequence of small named refactorings, and the full suite re-run after every step. Use when the user wants to refactor, restructure, clean up, simplify, or improve the design of existing code, or to apply refactoring recommendations from a code-review or architectural-analysis report. This skill changes code; it does not review code (use code-review), assess architecture (use architectural-analysis), or build new behavior test-first (use tdd). Do not use it on code inside an active tdd loop; the refactor step of tdd owns that cleanup. Runs its planned sequence to completion without pausing for review; to review each named refactoring as it lands, use pairing.

Drive Graphify from its CLI to build, refresh, query, export, and serve a durable code/corpus knowledge graph. Use when the user wants `.graphify/GRAPH_REPORT.md`, `graph.json`, `graph.html`, `graphify update`/`summary`/`query`/`path`/`explain`/`tree`, change-aware review context, git-hook or watch-based refresh, a stdio MCP graph server, or an install into jeo, jeopi, gjc, opencode, Claude, Codex, or Gemini. Also covers the honest structural fallback when native extraction is empty or misleading. Route simple locate/reference work to `codebase-search`, narrative knowledge-base work to `llm-wiki`, and project-memory handoff to `opencontext`. Triggers on: graphify, graphify update, graphify query, knowledge graph CLI, GRAPH_REPORT.md, graph.json, codebase graph, graph refresh, graphify install, graphify serve, review context, affected flows.

Invoke only when the user explicitly asks to review code through the "single level of abstraction / layered error handling" lens — a function does only its own layer's business logic while errors are handled above or below. The agent reports detections, raw-count measurements, and move directions. Apply only when the user explicitly requests this lens.

Create or amend a self-contained PowerPoint-like HTML briefing slide deck for alignment pages, interrogation questions, research findings, framework/workshop artifacts, specs, reports, or documentation plans. Use when Codex should make review material more visual and navigable while preserving dense alignment/interrogation pages and source documents as linked references instead of auto-opening them.