テスト・セキュリティのスキル

Repository conventions for commits, pull requests, and tests in this example project.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Build a behavior change with observed red, minimal green, and measured test consolidation

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when choosing native or multi-LLM handling for init, review, or security requests

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Wrap up a branch — run tests, create PR, merge or discard — use when implementation is done

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

URL validation and content sanitization for untrusted sources — use when handling external input safely

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Trace codepaths in diffs, map against tests, auto-generate missing coverage — use before shipping PRs

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

OWASP compliance, vulnerability scanning, and adversarial red team testing — use for security reviews

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Audit whether a multi-agent setup earns its coordination cost — use before adding an agent, or when a workflow feels slow or agents agree without adding signal

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Interrogate a plan, decision, or design one question at a time until it holds — use to stress-test your own thinking before committing to it

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Audit codebases for quality, consistency, and broken patterns — use for pre-release or tech debt review

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Verify assumptions before implementing large or risky changes to APIs, provider data, billing, pricing, quotas, or defaults. Use when a mistake could affect customers or the user asks if a change is safe to ship. Checks real-world impact beyond passing tests.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use Cua Driver for desktop or browser tasks that are awkward or unavailable through Bash/APIs, or when the user explicitly wants GUI interaction: app testing, visual bug reproduction, form filling, calendar entry, screenshots, and demo recording. Also covers Cua setup; not OpenAI Codex Computer Use or web research.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Working with tika-metadata-schema, the build-gated registry of Tika metadata keys — regeneration after Property changes, gate tests, naming conventions, post-rename sweeps. Use when adding or renaming metadata keys or when the schema gate fails.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Ground rules for working in the Tika codebase — git policy, Maven wrapper/repo conventions, building and testing specific modules, code and test conventions, pre-commit checks. Load at session start for any Tika development task.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Review of a PR, branch, or your own uncommitted work across eight dimensions — security, correctness, test coverage, API/compatibility, usability, documentation, code quality, performance. Sizes the diff, reviews inline or fans out reviewers off a shared brief, verifies findings against code, reports a grouped list with a shape verdict, fixes on approval. Use for "review this PR", "/pr-review 3011", or a pre-flight self-review before submitting; add "thorough" for adversarial verification.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use this skill to write the PR description (PR body) for any pull request opened against microsoft/apm. Produces one self-sufficient GitHub-Flavored Markdown artifact: TL;DR, Problem (WHY), Approach (WHAT), Implementation (HOW), 1-3 validated mermaid diagrams, explicit trade-offs, validation evidence, and a How-to-test section -- with every WHY-claim backed by a verbatim quote from PROSE or Agent Skills. Activate when the user asks to "write a PR description", "draft a PR body", "open a PR", "fill in the PR template", or any equivalent.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use this skill to run a holistic regrounding pass on the entire microsoft/apm documentation corpus against current source code, page-by-page, and emit surgical fixes for stale claims. Activate when the maintainer wants a WHOLE-CORPUS audit (not per-PR review) -- typical triggers include "audit the docs", "reground the corpus", "check every page against code", "pre-release docs sweep", "the docs have drifted everywhere", or "we just reshaped the TOC, find dead links". Wave-batched and S7-verified; scales to the full ~112-page corpus in ~10 minutes wall-time. This is a SIBLING to docs-sync, not a replacement: docs-sync is per-PR (triggered by a diff); this skill is per-corpus (triggered by a maintainer ask). They share agent personas, schemas, and the docs index, but their triggers MUST NOT collide. Does NOT auto-merge, does NOT push without maintainer review, and does NOT replace per-PR drift detection.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Activate when reviewing or modifying dependency resolution, lockfile schema, package downloaders, signature/integrity checks, file integration cleanup, or anything that could expose APM to dependency confusion, typosquatting, malicious packages, or token leakage.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use this skill to run a four-panel adversarial advisory review on any pull request that touches the OpenAPM specification artifact (docs/src/content/docs/specs/openapm-*.md), its inline / sidecar JSON Schemas (docs/src/content/docs/specs/schemas/*.schema.json), or the conformance fixture seed (tests/fixtures/spec-conformance/**). The panel fans out to four spec-ecosystem reviewers (swagger-openapi-editor, oci-distribution-editor, pkgmgr-registry-contract-editor, w3c-tag-architect), each running in its own agent thread, and a spec-editor synthesizer that produces a fold-now / defer-v0.1.1 / defer-v0.2 / reject list plus a ship decision keyed off a 1..10 shocked_meter scale. The orchestrator is the sole writer to the PR: ONE consolidated comment, no verdict labels, no merge gating. The panel is advisory -- it surfaces findings, prioritizes folds, and renders a ship recommendation that the maintainer weighs.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use this skill to verify CLAIM-LEVEL grounding of a documentation page (or set of pages) against the source code. Activate when you have specific pages to check for factual accuracy -- not when sweeping a whole corpus (use docs-corpus-audit for that) and not when triaging a PR diff (use docs-sync for that). Trigger nouns: "is this doc accurate", "verify the page against the code", "fact-check this section", "any claims that drifted from source", "fact-checking", "grounding audit", "drift hunt", "claim verification". Returns per-claim verdicts (GROUNDED | PARTIAL | CONTRADICTED | UNSUPPORTED) with file:line evidence citations. Catches paragraph-level inaccuracies that page-level audit averages over -- e.g. a paragraph with 5 claims where 4 are grounded and 1 is fabricated. Does NOT modify files (returns advisory only); does NOT re-architect the docs; does NOT triage PRs.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use this skill whenever a pull request is opened, reopened, or synchronized in microsoft/apm to assess whether and how the documentation corpus must change to stay truthful with the proposed code change. Activate even when the PR title or body says nothing about docs -- the skill must run on every PR to detect silent drift between code and docs. Classifies impact as no-change, in-place edit (one to a few paragraphs), or structural change (new page or TOC reshape), then orchestrates a CDO + doc-writer + python-architect + editorial-owner + growth-hacker loop to produce a patch-ready advisory. Does NOT review code quality, security, or test coverage. Does NOT auto-merge or auto-push doc edits.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Operate an explicitly activated LoopX Material Lifecycle for a connected project. Use for material-store inventory, lossless migration, candidate/archive transitions, exact-read-backed ranking, ranked-entry rebuilds, bounded Explore intake, owner-gated apply, rollback, and audit. Do not use for ordinary one-off reading or research when the project has not activated Material Lifecycle.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Keep code, tests, documentation, configuration, and other changes as tight, clear, performant, and minimal as possible without weakening behavior. Use during implementation to prevent unnecessary complexity, after behavior is proven to consolidate working changes, before handoff for a full branch audit, and when asked to simplify, tighten, clean up, reduce verbosity, remove complexity, or minimize existing work.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Build, audit, and fix @legendapp/list and LegendList usage in React, React Native, and web apps. Use for virtualization, scroll blanking, mount cost, data identity, recycling, row invalidation, measurement, chat anchoring, drawDistance, visibility, or Legend List performance regressions.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。