
Auto-review Go code for 100+ common mistakes when analyzing .go files, discussing Go patterns, or reviewing PRs with Go code. Checks error handling, concurrency, interfaces, performance, testing, and stdlib usage.
Audit and fix CLAUDE.md files using a tiered binary checklist based on official Anthropic best practices and community guidelines. Use when the user asks to "review CLAUDE.md", "audit CLAUDE.md", "score CLAUDE.md", "improve CLAUDE.md", or "fix CLAUDE.md".
Generate a semantic slug for the current session's work and copy the `/rename type/slug` command to clipboard. Use when the user asks what to call this session, wants a branch-style name for the work done, or asks to rename the conversation.
Fixture with API side effects and DMI guard. Use when validating CF-side-effect pass behavior for integration side effects.
Fixture with write side effects and a justify override. Use when validating justify mechanism.
Fixture with top-level shell script in scripts/. Use when validating SD-legacy-bash-info output.
Fixture with two tagged examples. Use when validating BP-example-tags informational threshold.
Fixture with write side effects but no DMI guard. Use when validating side-effect detection and unused-tool checks.
Review and fix Claude Code skill definitions (SKILL.md) using a tiered binary checklist based on the Agent Skills specification, Anthropic best practices, and community guidelines. Use when auditing, improving, or validating any skill before publishing.
Write tests that verify behavior (not implementation), use table-driven/parameterized patterns, and minimize mocking. Triggers when asked to write tests, add test coverage, or create test files. Also triggers when reviewing existing tests for quality.
This is an extremely long description field that is intentionally written to exceed the 1024 character limit imposed by the agent skills specification. The purpose of this fixture is to verify that the FM-desc-length check correctly identifies descriptions that are too long for efficient auto-invocation matching. When Claude Code loads skill descriptions for auto-invocation, long descriptions waste valuable context window space without improving match accuracy. This description continues with additional filler text to ensure it crosses the threshold. Adding more words here to pad the length. The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. This should now be well over the limit.
Diagnose and fix flaky e2e tests and general connectivity issues in service mesh environments (Kuma, Istio, Linkerd, Consul). Trigger when: a user mentions intermittent test failures, "test is flaky", e2e failures in CI that don't reproduce locally, Ginkgo/Gomega test files that fail sometimes, 503/connection refused errors, mTLS handshake failures, pods not getting traffic, xDS NACKs or warming resources, cert delivery timing issues, or "works locally but not in cluster". Covers Kuma flakiness patterns (timing races, xDS propagation delays, Envoy circuit breakers, mTLS readiness, Gomega misuse) AND universal mesh debugging (control plane connectivity, proxy lifecycle, certificate problems, traffic routing/policy, service discovery).
Daily AI news digest covering technical advances, business news, and engineering impact. Aggregates from research papers, tech blogs, HN, newsletters. Use daily for staying current on AI developments.
Produce a daily AI news digest and reuse the source workflow under `claude/ai-daily-digest`. Use when the user wants a curated AI briefing or roundup in Codex.
List, reply to, resolve, and create GitHub PR review comment threads using gh CLI scripts. Use when managing code review feedback, replying to reviewer remarks, resolving review conversations, creating reviews with line-level comments, or bulk-processing threads by author.
Stage selected git hunks non-interactively by reusing the source workflow under `claude/git-stage-hunk`. Use when only part of a file should be committed.
Review Go code using the source material under `claude/go-code-review`. Use when the user wants a focused Go review grounded in known failure patterns.
Identify and remove AI writing patterns to make text sound natural and human-written. Use when humanizing commit messages, PR descriptions, review comments, docs, changelogs, or release notes. Also for de-slopping text that sounds robotic, has AI vibes, or reads like ChatGPT output.
Rewrite text to sound less formulaic by reusing the source workflow under `claude/humanize`. Use when the user wants writing to sound more natural in Codex.
--- name: kubecon-cfp description: Interactive KubeCon CFP submission writer. Guides through topic selection, title crafting, abstract writing, and benefits section using acceptance data from 1,100+ talks across 7 KubeCon events (2024-2025). Use when preparing a conference talk proposal for KubeCon/CloudNativeCon, writing a CFP, or asking about KubeCon submission strategy. argument-hint: [topic or talk idea] [--track AI|Security|Platform|Observability|...] [--format session|lightning|tutorial|pa
Draft and refine KubeCon CFPs by reusing the source workflow under `claude/kubecon-cfp`. Use when the user wants to assess or improve a KubeCon proposal in Codex.
Critique implementation plans by reusing the source workflow under `claude/plan-critic`. Use when the user wants a plan stress-tested before implementation.
Review code changes with staff-level depth by reusing the source workflow under `claude/staff-code-review`. Use when the user wants a thorough review beyond line-level correctness.
Build and refine staff-level engineering resumes through interactive coaching, research-backed best practices, and per-job tailoring. Use when building, improving, or tailoring a resume for Staff/Principal engineer roles.
Coach and tailor staff-level resumes by reusing the source workflow under `claude/staff-resume`. Use when the user wants a staff-oriented resume review or rewrite in Codex.
Write or review behavior-first tests by reusing the source workflow under `claude/test-writer`. Use when the user wants tests added or existing tests reviewed in Codex.
Audit Codex skill bundles before publishing. Use when reviewing or fixing a Codex skill's SKILL.md, references, scripts, or agents/openai.yaml for routing clarity, metadata quality, shell safety, and approval flow.
Generate a semantic session slug by reusing the source workflow under `claude/slug`. Use when the user wants a branch-style name or `/rename` command in Codex.
Diagnose flaky service-mesh tests and connectivity issues by reusing the source workflow under `claude/service-mesh-debug`. Use when the user is debugging mesh flakiness, xDS issues, or mTLS failures.
Audit `CLAUDE.md` files by reusing the source workflow under `claude/review-claude-md`. Use when the user wants a CLAUDE.md contract reviewed or fixed in Codex.
Clean stale local branches and worktrees by reusing the source workflow under `claude/git-clean-gone`. Use when merged or abandoned work leaves gone branches behind.
List, reply to, resolve, unresolve, and create GitHub PR review comment threads using gh CLI scripts.
Use when the user asks for council review, multi-persona critique, debate, design review, code review, architecture feedback, UX review, or tradeoff analysis. Bare invocations use `core` profile auto-detect; explicit `auto` selects the best-fit 6 personas from the sourced 27-persona engineering and UX roster. Users can still pin `core`, `core-eng`, `core-ux`, `core-mix`, `all`, or `debate`.
Clean up local branches with deleted remote tracking and their worktrees. Use after merging PRs to remove stale branches, detect squash-merged and rebased branches, and clean up associated worktrees.
Stage only specific hunks from the working tree for selective commits. Use when a file has changes from multiple sessions, parallel AI agents, or mixed user and agent edits and you need to commit only the changes made by the current session. Use when git add -p is unavailable or when you need non-interactive partial staging. Lists hunks with IDs, stages by hunk ID, file, regex pattern, or line range.
Critique a Claude implementation plan before approving execution. Spawns parallel persona subagents (Skeptic, Architect, Verifier) to evaluate the plan against the codebase and return an Approve/Reject/Refine verdict with concrete refinements. Use when a plan has been generated (Plan Mode output, ExitPlanMode, pasted plan text, or plan file path) and needs review before code is written. Triggers on "critique this plan", "review this plan", "is this plan good", "poke holes in this plan", "should I approve this plan", or sharing a plan for evaluation.
Fixture with API write-side effects and no DMI guard. Use when validating CF-side-effect API detection.
Test skill with attributed example tags. Use when testing example tag detection.
Test fixture using bullet-list argument format instead of tables. Use when verifying bullet-list parsing.
Fixture with duplicated markdown table between SKILL.md and references. Use when validating RF-dup-tables-info.
Fixture with sufficient example flag coverage. Use when validating FC-example-flags pass behavior.
Fixture with low example flag coverage. Use when validating FC-example-flags fail behavior.
Test fixture with missing read gates. Use when verifying RG-gate-present detection.
Fixture with tagged examples and clear boundaries. Use when validating positive best-practice signals.
Fixture with no <example> tags. Use when validating best-practice checks for examples and over-prompting.
Test fixture with unused tools in allowed-tools. Use when verifying CF-tools-usage detection.
A test fixture that passes all checks. Use when verifying the validator works on clean input.
Run council reviews with sourced engineering, UX, reliability, performance, AI, and strategy persona lenses. Use when the user asks for council review, multi-persona critique, debate, design review, code review, architecture feedback, UX review, or tradeoff analysis.
Use when the user invokes $council, $council:council, Council review, or Council debate. Use loaded SKILL body or one direct installed `skills/council/SKILL.md` read. Direct read path must contain `/.codex/plugins/cache/sai/council/` and end `/skills/council/SKILL.md`. `cd <cwd> && sed -n ... <path>` is valid. Do not use `pwd`, `ls`, `find`, `rg`, `cat`, multiple `&&`, or `;`. Never use repo-local paths. If unavailable, stop exactly `Council not run: skill unavailable.` At most one pre-tool message, exact `Council progress:` line only. Non-final lines start `Council progress:`.
Use when turning rough instructions into optimized, evidence-based AI prompts for system prompts, task prompts, coding-agent instructions, tools, eval graders, subagent briefings, or prompt-improvement work. Copies to clipboard.
Turn rough instructions into stronger prompts using the source workflow at `claude/promptgen`. Use when the user wants a task prompt, system prompt, coding-agent prompt, tool description, eval grader, subagent briefing, or prompt-improvement pass rather than direct execution.
Staff-engineer-level code review that goes beyond correctness to evaluate architectural alignment, system-level implications, failure modes, performance, scalability, backward compatibility, observability, security, and cross-team impact. Use when reviewing a PR (URL or diff), analyzing code changes for architectural fitness, or when the user asks for a thorough/staff-level/senior review of code changes. Triggers on "review this PR", "review these changes", "staff review", "thorough code review", sharing a GitHub PR URL for review, or asking about the architectural impact of changes.
Run the council workflow from a normal Copilot session only when the user explicitly asks for council review, multi-persona critique, debate, design review, code review, architecture feedback, UX review, or tradeoff analysis. Do not use it for commit, stage, merge, approval, or generic pre-commit requests. Accept the same mode syntax as the bundled council reviewers: `core|auto|core-eng|core-ux|core-mix|all|debate <problem|@file>`. During council slash-command use, the current session agent moderates reviewer agents directly. Runs broader than 6 reviewers require explicit AskUserQuestion approval before launch.