Skill UI

Learn how to integrate CodeRabbit as a mandatory Continuous Integration (CI) gate within your GitHub repository. This comprehensive guide demonstrates setting up branch protection rules, creating GitHub Actions workflows, and enforcing CodeRabbit's reviews to ensure high code quality before merging. Includes advanced setup for PR size checks and notification mechanisms.

A comprehensive collection of patterns and best practices for automating GitHub workflows using advanced AI models. This skill enables automated PR reviews, sophisticated issue triage (labeling and commenting), and seamless integration of AI into CI/CD pipelines, significantly enhancing DevOps efficiency and code quality assurance.

This sophisticated tool automates the security review of serverless functions across major cloud providers, including AWS Lambda, Azure Functions, and GCP Cloud Functions. It systematically identifies critical misconfigurations such as overly permissive IAM execution roles (wildcard actions), hardcoded secrets in environment variables, and potential lack of runtime protections. Ideal for pre-production auditing and compliance checks.

This advanced code review skill forces genuine perspective shifts by employing three hostile reviewer personas: the Saboteur (production breaks), the New Hire (maintainability), and the Security Auditor (OWASP-informed). It ensures that all code reviews are critically rigorous, eliminating superficial "Looks Good To Me" approvals and catching blind spots missed by the original author or general AI models. Use it before merging a PR for maximum confidence.

This skill performs a rigorous, adversarial review of implemented code. It verifies that the task implementation is complete, structurally sound, respects defined boundaries, and aligns perfectly with approved requirements and design specifications. Use it after an implementer finishes work, or before final acceptance, to ensure code quality and architectural integrity.

This skill facilitates a rigorous, documentation-anchored design review session. It challenges a proposed plan by cross-referencing it against the project's established domain glossary (CONTEXT.md), historical architectural decisions (ADRs), and the current codebase. It forces the user to resolve ambiguities, define precise terminology, and validate design trade-offs using concrete scenarios, ensuring all decisions are captured and documented inline.

This skill provides comprehensive management for Opencode's permission system. It allows users to review currently always-allowed commands, suggest safe read-only commands, and configure granular access controls using allow/deny/ask patterns. It is essential for optimizing security, performing system audits, and managing the operational scope of the agent.

A structured presentation deck designed for rigorous review of safety incidents, security risks, and policy compliance. It utilizes distinct visual cues, including hazard stripes, L1/L2/L3 severity tiers, and dedicated code blocks for policy review (e.g., YAML). Ideal for red team exercises, post-incident reviews, and high-stakes technical briefings.

Provides comprehensive guidelines for authors submitting papers to Acta Automatica Sinica (AAS). It details how to organize and present anonymous, reproducible code, data, and experimental artifacts to enhance the credibility and rigor of research in control, automation, and pattern recognition, supporting the double-blind review process.

This guide outlines the rigorous standards for achieving robust reproducibility in robotics research papers, especially those involving physical hardware. It details a two-tier approach, defining results as either fully *rerunnable* (code/simulation) or fully *auditable* (hardware logs/protocols). Key requirements include creating comprehensive hardware specification ledgers, logging detailed sensor data (rosbags), separating deterministic from stochastic claims, and structuring the entire repository for peer review.

A comprehensive guide for structuring the evidence bundle required for robotics research submissions. It details the critical components—including hardware ledgers, time-stamped logs, configuration files, code, and data—necessary to ensure that scientific claims are fully auditable and reproducible, addressing the needs of skeptical reviewers.

A comprehensive guide for authors preparing artifacts (code, data, models, etc.) for submission to the Journal of Computer-Aided Design & Computer Graphics (JCAD&CG). It details best practices for ensuring research reproducibility, writing honest availability statements, and managing artifacts during the double-blind review process, focusing on ethical standards regardless of specific journal policy.