[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"skill:01M71T4KXW0K04BHW6RCT5FHSM":3,"skill-same:01M71T4KXW0K04BHW6RCT5FHSM":67},{"skillNo":4,"name":5,"nameZh":6,"description":7,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":15,"categories":16,"keywords":27,"publishedAt":42,"linkOnly":43,"markdownContent":44,"markdownBody":45,"frontMatter":46,"refName":47,"commitSha":48,"skillDirectory":49,"forksCount":13,"repositoryHtmlUrl":50,"repositoryHomepageUrl":6,"ownerHtmlUrl":51,"ownerBlogUrl":6,"ownerDescription":6,"updatedAt":52,"install":53,"resources":66},"01M71T4KXW0K04BHW6RCT5FHSM","receiving-code-review",null,"Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performat...","javiertarazon\u002Fide-agente-free-jt7-","javiertarazon","https:\u002F\u002Favatars.githubusercontent.com\u002Fu\u002F153141207?v=4","01M71R52TB3S9HXKH6WSNT8A7V","01M71R52VG5KS2DKDDH4GDQ30A",0,"MIT","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjaviertarazon\u002Fide-agente-free-jt7-\u002Fblob\u002Frelease\u002Fv4.2.11-panel-pro\u002F.github\u002Fskills\u002Freceiving-code-review\u002FSKILL.md",[17,22],{"categoryNo":18,"categoryName":19,"taxonomyType":20,"taxonomyTypeDesc":21},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000007","代码审查","SCENARIO","使用场景",{"categoryNo":23,"categoryName":24,"taxonomyType":25,"taxonomyTypeDesc":26},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000030","开发工程师","PROFESSION","适用职业",[28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41],"code review","code","review","receiving code review","community","feedback","code review feedback","implementing","review feedback","technical","use","when","unknown","verification","2026-11-10 13:02:02",false,"---\nname: receiving-code-review\ndescription: \"Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performat...\"\nrisk: unknown\nsource: community\n---\n\n# Code Review Reception\n\n## Overview\n\nCode review requires technical evaluation, not emotional performance.\n\n**Core principle:** Verify before implementing. Ask before assuming. Technical correctness over social comfort.\n\n## The Response Pattern\n\n```\nWHEN receiving code review feedback:\n\n1. READ: Complete feedback without reacting\n2. UNDERSTAND: Restate requirement in own words (or ask)\n3. VERIFY: Check against codebase reality\n4. EVALUATE: Technically sound for THIS codebase?\n5. RESPOND: Technical acknowledgment or reasoned pushback\n6. IMPLEMENT: One item at a time, test each\n```\n\n## Forbidden Responses\n\n**NEVER:**\n- \"You're absolutely right!\" (explicit CLAUDE.md violation)\n- \"Great point!\" \u002F \"Excellent feedback!\" (performative)\n- \"Let me implement that now\" (before verification)\n\n**INSTEAD:**\n- Restate the technical requirement\n- Ask clarifying questions\n- Push back with technical reasoning if wrong\n- Just start working (actions > words)\n\n## Handling Unclear Feedback\n\n```\nIF any item is unclear:\n  STOP - do not implement anything yet\n  ASK for clarification on unclear items\n\nWHY: Items may be related. Partial understanding = wrong implementation.\n```\n\n**Example:**\n```\nyour human partner: \"Fix 1-6\"\nYou understand 1,2,3,6. Unclear on 4,5.\n\n❌ WRONG: Implement 1,2,3,6 now, ask about 4,5 later\n✅ RIGHT: \"I understand items 1,2,3,6. Need clarification on 4 and 5 before proceeding.\"\n```\n\n## Source-Specific Handling\n\n### From your human partner\n- **Trusted** - implement after understanding\n- **Still ask** if scope unclear\n- **No performative agreement**\n- **Skip to action** or technical acknowledgment\n\n### From External Reviewers\n```\nBEFORE implementing:\n  1. Check: Technically correct for THIS codebase?\n  2. Check: Breaks existing functionality?\n  3. Check: Reason for current implementation?\n  4. Check: Works on all platforms\u002Fversions?\n  5. Check: Does reviewer understand full context?\n\nIF suggestion seems wrong:\n  Push back with technical reasoning\n\nIF can't easily verify:\n  Say so: \"I can't verify this without [X]. Should I [investigate\u002Fask\u002Fproceed]?\"\n\nIF conflicts with your human partner's prior decisions:\n  Stop and discuss with your human partner first\n```\n\n**your human partner's rule:** \"External feedback - be skeptical, but check carefully\"\n\n## YAGNI Check for \"Professional\" Features\n\n```\nIF reviewer suggests \"implementing properly\":\n  grep codebase for actual usage\n\n  IF unused: \"This endpoint isn't called. Remove it (YAGNI)?\"\n  IF used: Then implement properly\n```\n\n**your human partner's rule:** \"You and reviewer both report to me. If we don't need this feature, don't add it.\"\n\n## Implementation Order\n\n```\nFOR multi-item feedback:\n  1. Clarify anything unclear FIRST\n  2. Then implement in this order:\n     - Blocking issues (breaks, security)\n     - Simple fixes (typos, imports)\n     - Complex fixes (refactoring, logic)\n  3. Test each fix individually\n  4. Verify no regressions\n```\n\n## When To Push Back\n\nPush back when:\n- Suggestion breaks existing functionality\n- Reviewer lacks full context\n- Violates YAGNI (unused feature)\n- Technically incorrect for this stack\n- Legacy\u002Fcompatibility reasons exist\n- Conflicts with your human partner's architectural decisions\n\n**How to push back:**\n- Use technical reasoning, not defensiveness\n- Ask specific questions\n- Reference working tests\u002Fcode\n- Involve your human partner if architectural\n\n**Signal if uncomfortable pushing back out loud:** \"Strange things are afoot at the Circle K\"\n\n## Acknowledging Correct Feedback\n\nWhen feedback IS correct:\n```\n✅ \"Fixed. [Brief description of what changed]\"\n✅ \"Good catch - [specific issue]. Fixed in [location].\"\n✅ [Just fix it and show in the code]\n\n❌ \"You're absolutely right!\"\n❌ \"Great point!\"\n❌ \"Thanks for catching that!\"\n❌ \"Thanks for [anything]\"\n❌ ANY gratitude expression\n```\n\n**Why no thanks:** Actions speak. Just fix it. The code itself shows you heard the feedback.\n\n**If you catch yourself about to write \"Thanks\":** DELETE IT. State the fix instead.\n\n## Gracefully Correcting Your Pushback\n\nIf you pushed back and were wrong:\n```\n✅ \"You were right - I checked [X] and it does [Y]. Implementing now.\"\n✅ \"Verified this and you're correct. My initial understanding was wrong because [reason]. Fixing.\"\n\n❌ Long apology\n❌ Defending why you pushed back\n❌ Over-explaining\n```\n\nState the correction factually and move on.\n\n## Common Mistakes\n\n| Mistake | Fix |\n|---------|-----|\n| Performative agreement | State requirement or just act |\n| Blind implementation | Verify against codebase first |\n| Batch without testing | One at a time, test each |\n| Assuming reviewer is right | Check if breaks things |\n| Avoiding pushback | Technical correctness > comfort |\n| Partial implementation | Clarify all items first |\n| Can't verify, proceed anyway | State limitation, ask for direction |\n\n## Real Examples\n\n**Performative Agreement (Bad):**\n```\nReviewer: \"Remove legacy code\"\n❌ \"You're absolutely right! Let me remove that...\"\n```\n\n**Technical Verification (Good):**\n```\nReviewer: \"Remove legacy code\"\n✅ \"Checking... build target is 10.15+, this API needs 13+. Need legacy for backward compat. Current impl has wrong bundle ID - fix it or drop pre-13 support?\"\n```\n\n**YAGNI (Good):**\n```\nReviewer: \"Implement proper metrics tracking with database, date filters, CSV export\"\n✅ \"Grepped codebase - nothing calls this endpoint. Remove it (YAGNI)? Or is there usage I'm missing?\"\n```\n\n**Unclear Item (Good):**\n```\nyour human partner: \"Fix items 1-6\"\nYou understand 1,2,3,6. Unclear on 4,5.\n✅ \"Understand 1,2,3,6. Need clarification on 4 and 5 before implementing.\"\n```\n\n## GitHub Thread Replies\n\nWhen replying to inline review comments on GitHub, reply in the comment thread (`gh api repos\u002F{owner}\u002F{repo}\u002Fpulls\u002F{pr}\u002Fcomments\u002F{id}\u002Freplies`), not as a top-level PR comment.\n\n## The Bottom Line\n\n**External feedback = suggestions to evaluate, not orders to follow.**\n\nVerify. Question. Then implement.\n\nNo performative agreement. Technical rigor always.\n\n## When to Use\nThis skill is applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview.\n","# Code Review Reception\n\n## Overview\n\nCode review requires technical evaluation, not emotional performance.\n\n**Core principle:** Verify before implementing. Ask before assuming. Technical correctness over social comfort.\n\n## The Response Pattern\n\n```\nWHEN receiving code review feedback:\n\n1. READ: Complete feedback without reacting\n2. UNDERSTAND: Restate requirement in own words (or ask)\n3. VERIFY: Check against codebase reality\n4. EVALUATE: Technically sound for THIS codebase?\n5. RESPOND: Technical acknowledgment or reasoned pushback\n6. IMPLEMENT: One item at a time, test each\n```\n\n## Forbidden Responses\n\n**NEVER:**\n- \"You're absolutely right!\" (explicit CLAUDE.md violation)\n- \"Great point!\" \u002F \"Excellent feedback!\" (performative)\n- \"Let me implement that now\" (before verification)\n\n**INSTEAD:**\n- Restate the technical requirement\n- Ask clarifying questions\n- Push back with technical reasoning if wrong\n- Just start working (actions > words)\n\n## Handling Unclear Feedback\n\n```\nIF any item is unclear:\n  STOP - do not implement anything yet\n  ASK for clarification on unclear items\n\nWHY: Items may be related. Partial understanding = wrong implementation.\n```\n\n**Example:**\n```\nyour human partner: \"Fix 1-6\"\nYou understand 1,2,3,6. Unclear on 4,5.\n\n❌ WRONG: Implement 1,2,3,6 now, ask about 4,5 later\n✅ RIGHT: \"I understand items 1,2,3,6. Need clarification on 4 and 5 before proceeding.\"\n```\n\n## Source-Specific Handling\n\n### From your human partner\n- **Trusted** - implement after understanding\n- **Still ask** if scope unclear\n- **No performative agreement**\n- **Skip to action** or technical acknowledgment\n\n### From External Reviewers\n```\nBEFORE implementing:\n  1. Check: Technically correct for THIS codebase?\n  2. Check: Breaks existing functionality?\n  3. Check: Reason for current implementation?\n  4. Check: Works on all platforms\u002Fversions?\n  5. Check: Does reviewer understand full context?\n\nIF suggestion seems wrong:\n  Push back with technical reasoning\n\nIF can't easily verify:\n  Say so: \"I can't verify this without [X]. Should I [investigate\u002Fask\u002Fproceed]?\"\n\nIF conflicts with your human partner's prior decisions:\n  Stop and discuss with your human partner first\n```\n\n**your human partner's rule:** \"External feedback - be skeptical, but check carefully\"\n\n## YAGNI Check for \"Professional\" Features\n\n```\nIF reviewer suggests \"implementing properly\":\n  grep codebase for actual usage\n\n  IF unused: \"This endpoint isn't called. Remove it (YAGNI)?\"\n  IF used: Then implement properly\n```\n\n**your human partner's rule:** \"You and reviewer both report to me. If we don't need this feature, don't add it.\"\n\n## Implementation Order\n\n```\nFOR multi-item feedback:\n  1. Clarify anything unclear FIRST\n  2. Then implement in this order:\n     - Blocking issues (breaks, security)\n     - Simple fixes (typos, imports)\n     - Complex fixes (refactoring, logic)\n  3. Test each fix individually\n  4. Verify no regressions\n```\n\n## When To Push Back\n\nPush back when:\n- Suggestion breaks existing functionality\n- Reviewer lacks full context\n- Violates YAGNI (unused feature)\n- Technically incorrect for this stack\n- Legacy\u002Fcompatibility reasons exist\n- Conflicts with your human partner's architectural decisions\n\n**How to push back:**\n- Use technical reasoning, not defensiveness\n- Ask specific questions\n- Reference working tests\u002Fcode\n- Involve your human partner if architectural\n\n**Signal if uncomfortable pushing back out loud:** \"Strange things are afoot at the Circle K\"\n\n## Acknowledging Correct Feedback\n\nWhen feedback IS correct:\n```\n✅ \"Fixed. [Brief description of what changed]\"\n✅ \"Good catch - [specific issue]. Fixed in [location].\"\n✅ [Just fix it and show in the code]\n\n❌ \"You're absolutely right!\"\n❌ \"Great point!\"\n❌ \"Thanks for catching that!\"\n❌ \"Thanks for [anything]\"\n❌ ANY gratitude expression\n```\n\n**Why no thanks:** Actions speak. Just fix it. The code itself shows you heard the feedback.\n\n**If you catch yourself about to write \"Thanks\":** DELETE IT. State the fix instead.\n\n## Gracefully Correcting Your Pushback\n\nIf you pushed back and were wrong:\n```\n✅ \"You were right - I checked [X] and it does [Y]. Implementing now.\"\n✅ \"Verified this and you're correct. My initial understanding was wrong because [reason]. Fixing.\"\n\n❌ Long apology\n❌ Defending why you pushed back\n❌ Over-explaining\n```\n\nState the correction factually and move on.\n\n## Common Mistakes\n\n| Mistake | Fix |\n|---------|-----|\n| Performative agreement | State requirement or just act |\n| Blind implementation | Verify against codebase first |\n| Batch without testing | One at a time, test each |\n| Assuming reviewer is right | Check if breaks things |\n| Avoiding pushback | Technical correctness > comfort |\n| Partial implementation | Clarify all items first |\n| Can't verify, proceed anyway | State limitation, ask for direction |\n\n## Real Examples\n\n**Performative Agreement (Bad):**\n```\nReviewer: \"Remove legacy code\"\n❌ \"You're absolutely right! Let me remove that...\"\n```\n\n**Technical Verification (Good):**\n```\nReviewer: \"Remove legacy code\"\n✅ \"Checking... build target is 10.15+, this API needs 13+. Need legacy for backward compat. Current impl has wrong bundle ID - fix it or drop pre-13 support?\"\n```\n\n**YAGNI (Good):**\n```\nReviewer: \"Implement proper metrics tracking with database, date filters, CSV export\"\n✅ \"Grepped codebase - nothing calls this endpoint. Remove it (YAGNI)? Or is there usage I'm missing?\"\n```\n\n**Unclear Item (Good):**\n```\nyour human partner: \"Fix items 1-6\"\nYou understand 1,2,3,6. Unclear on 4,5.\n✅ \"Understand 1,2,3,6. Need clarification on 4 and 5 before implementing.\"\n```\n\n## GitHub Thread Replies\n\nWhen replying to inline review comments on GitHub, reply in the comment thread (`gh api repos\u002F{owner}\u002F{repo}\u002Fpulls\u002F{pr}\u002Fcomments\u002F{id}\u002Freplies`), not as a top-level PR comment.\n\n## The Bottom Line\n\n**External feedback = suggestions to evaluate, not orders to follow.**\n\nVerify. Question. Then implement.\n\nNo performative agreement. Technical rigor always.\n\n## When to Use\nThis skill is applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview.\n",{"name":5,"risk":40,"source":32,"description":7},"release\u002Fv4.2.11-panel-pro","a92ea02bcf7e2b3dbaf46d49696c29a3cb490d4f",".github\u002Fskills\u002Freceiving-code-review","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjaviertarazon\u002Fide-agente-free-jt7-","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjaviertarazon","2026-07-12 07:10:45",{"source":8,"skillName":5,"commands":54,"prompt":64,"zipAvailable":65},[55,58,61],{"tool":56,"command":57},"npx","npx skills add javiertarazon\u002Fide-agente-free-jt7- --skill receiving-code-review",{"tool":59,"command":60},"bunx","bunx skills add javiertarazon\u002Fide-agente-free-jt7- --skill receiving-code-review",{"tool":62,"command":63},"pnpm","pnpm dlx skills add javiertarazon\u002Fide-agente-free-jt7- --skill receiving-code-review","安装技能，技能地址：https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjaviertarazon\u002Fide-agente-free-jt7-\u002Fblob\u002Frelease\u002Fv4.2.11-panel-pro\u002F.github\u002Fskills\u002Freceiving-code-review\u002FSKILL.md",true,[],[68,93,120,140,155,176],{"skillNo":69,"name":70,"nameZh":6,"description":71,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":72,"categories":73,"keywords":77,"publishedAt":42},"01M71TQ7Q6Z10VWF3C2H5X1KW9","zustand-store-ts","Create Zustand stores with TypeScript, subscribeWithSelector middleware, and proper state\u002Faction separation. Use when building React state management, creating global stores, or implementing reacti...","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjaviertarazon\u002Fide-agente-free-jt7-\u002Fblob\u002Frelease\u002Fv4.2.11-panel-pro\u002F.github\u002Fskills\u002Fzustand-store-ts\u002FSKILL.md",[74],{"categoryNo":75,"categoryName":76,"taxonomyType":20,"taxonomyTypeDesc":21},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000009","前端开发",[78,79,80,32,81,35,38,82,39,40,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,92],"zustand","store","zustand store ts","middleware","react state management","react","with","state","create","state management","typescript","action","management","separation","global",{"skillNo":94,"name":95,"nameZh":6,"description":96,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":97,"categories":98,"keywords":102,"publishedAt":42},"01M71TQ5EAR40G6W0MV5ZDVEZT","zoom-automation","Automate Zoom meeting creation, management, recordings, webinars, and participant tracking via Rube MCP (Composio). Always search tools first for current schemas.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjaviertarazon\u002Fide-agente-free-jt7-\u002Fblob\u002Frelease\u002Fv4.2.11-panel-pro\u002F.github\u002Fskills\u002Fzoom-automation\u002FSKILL.md",[99],{"categoryNo":100,"categoryName":101,"taxonomyType":20,"taxonomyTypeDesc":21},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000023","Skill与智能体开发",[103,104,105,32,106,107,108,109,110,40,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,118,90,119],"zoom automation","zoom","automation","creation","for","search","schemas","MCP","first","via","meeting","search tools","tracking","webinars","composio","recordings","Tools",{"skillNo":121,"name":122,"nameZh":6,"description":123,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":124,"categories":125,"keywords":127,"publishedAt":42},"01M71TQ29B1EYBCEAP1ZBGXQ1A","zoho-crm-automation","Automate Zoho CRM tasks via Rube MCP (Composio): create\u002Fupdate records, search contacts, manage leads, and convert leads. Always search tools first for current schemas.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjaviertarazon\u002Fide-agente-free-jt7-\u002Fblob\u002Frelease\u002Fv4.2.11-panel-pro\u002F.github\u002Fskills\u002Fzoho-crm-automation\u002FSKILL.md",[126],{"categoryNo":100,"categoryName":101,"taxonomyType":20,"taxonomyTypeDesc":21},[128,129,105,130,131,132,32,133,134,107,135,108,109,136,110,40,137,138,139,86],"crm automation","zoho crm automation","crm","zoho crm","zoho","leads","manage leads","manage","records","convert","tasks","contacts",{"skillNo":141,"name":142,"nameZh":6,"description":143,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":144,"categories":145,"keywords":147,"publishedAt":42},"01M71TPZPMN60DH0XV58KVHY23","zendesk-automation","Automate Zendesk tasks via Rube MCP (Composio): tickets, users, organizations, replies. Always search tools first for current schemas.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjaviertarazon\u002Fide-agente-free-jt7-\u002Fblob\u002Frelease\u002Fv4.2.11-panel-pro\u002F.github\u002Fskills\u002Fzendesk-automation\u002FSKILL.md",[146],{"categoryNo":100,"categoryName":101,"taxonomyType":20,"taxonomyTypeDesc":21},[148,105,149,32,107,108,109,110,150,40,138,151,152,111,112,153,114,117,119,154],"zendesk automation","zendesk","organizations","replies","users","tickets","automate",{"skillNo":156,"name":157,"nameZh":6,"description":158,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":159,"categories":160,"keywords":161,"publishedAt":42},"01M71TPXDWKHKG4N6TVEPXWD0N","zapier-make-patterns","No-code automation democratizes workflow building. Zapier and Make (formerly Integromat) let non-developers automate business processes without writing code. But no-code doesn't mean no-complexity ...","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjaviertarazon\u002Fide-agente-free-jt7-\u002Fblob\u002Frelease\u002Fv4.2.11-panel-pro\u002F.github\u002Fskills\u002Fzapier-make-patterns\u002FSKILL.md",[],[162,163,164,165,166,167,168,169,170,105,171,40,29,172,173,174,175,154],"zapier make patterns","zapier","patterns","make","No-Code","complexity","writing","spawner","business","workflow","integromat","apache","processes","but",{"skillNo":177,"name":178,"nameZh":6,"description":179,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":180,"categories":181,"keywords":185,"publishedAt":42},"01M71TPT5T10WXNKW9G7ZXZ27W","youtube-summarizer","Extract transcripts from YouTube videos and generate comprehensive, detailed summaries using intelligent analysis frameworks","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjaviertarazon\u002Fide-agente-free-jt7-\u002Fblob\u002Frelease\u002Fv4.2.11-panel-pro\u002F.github\u002Fskills\u002Fyoutube-summarizer\u002FSKILL.md",[182],{"categoryNo":183,"categoryName":184,"taxonomyType":20,"taxonomyTypeDesc":21},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000016","图像与多媒体",[186,187,188,189,32,190,191,192,193,194,195,196,29,197,198,199,200,201,202,203],"summarizer","youtube","youtube summarizer","Video","content-analysis","frameworks","copilot","2025","github-copilot","extract transcripts","analysis","codex","cli","summaries","github","generate","summarization","2026"]