ArabelaTso

Translate natural-language requirements or structured specification documents into formal temporal logic properties (LTL, CTL, safety/liveness properties). Use when users need to formalize requirements for model checking, formal verification, or property specification. Handles embedded/real-time systems, hardware verification, concurrent systems, and reactive systems. Resolves ambiguities, asks clarifying questions when needed, and outputs machine-checkable formulas with explanations. Supports multiple output formats (SPIN, NuSMV, Uppaal, TLA+, Maude).

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。

Analyze vulnerable code to identify underlying root causes such as violated assumptions, incorrect invariants, missing validation checks, or unsafe component interactions. Use when investigating security vulnerabilities, CVEs, exploit code, or security audit findings. Infers why the vulnerability exists beyond surface symptoms, identifies systemic issues, and explains the chain of failures that enable exploitation.

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。

Analyze failing tests to detect functional bugs in code. Takes repository and failing test output as input, analyzes execution behavior, assertions, and stack traces to identify suspicious code regions and root causes. Use when debugging test failures, investigating regression bugs, or understanding why tests fail. Explains the bug mechanism, identifies affected code, and suggests fixes based on test expectations vs actual behavior.

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。

Generate comprehensive test case documentation from test code, test framework output, existing test docs, and source code context. Use when documenting test suites, creating test specifications, generating test coverage reports, onboarding developers to testing practices, or preparing QA documentation. Analyzes test functions (pytest, unittest) to extract test names, docstrings, assertions, and organization, then produces structured markdown with both overview-level summaries and detailed test case specifications including purpose, preconditions, steps, expected results, and test data. Triggers when users ask to document tests, generate test specifications, create test reports, summarize test coverage, or explain what tests do.

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。

Creates visual representations of system structure including architecture diagrams, data flow diagrams, deployment diagrams, and sequence diagrams. Use when Claude needs to visualize system components, infrastructure, data flows, or interactions. Supports Mermaid (recommended for Markdown/GitHub), PlantUML (for detailed UML), and Graphviz/DOT (for complex networks). Trigger when users request diagrams, visualizations, or ask to "show", "diagram", "visualize", or "map out" system architecture, infrastructure, data flows, or component interactions.

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。

Performs symbolic execution to detect potential errors by exploring execution paths, solving path constraints, and generating test inputs. Use when you need to analyze code for bugs like null dereferences, division by zero, buffer overflows, or assertion violations. Also use to generate test inputs that exercise different code paths, find edge cases, or explore all reachable program states. Supports Python, Java, and C/C++ through manual symbolic execution techniques and integration with tools like KLEE, angr, Z3, and Symbolic PathFinder.

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。

Generate implementation code and tests from written specifications. Use when the user provides specifications (natural language descriptions, formal specs, requirements documents, API specs) and asks Claude to implement the described functionality. Supports data structures, algorithms, classes, functions, and includes automatic test generation to validate implementation against specification.

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。

Analyze source code statically to detect potential functional bugs including null dereferences, incorrect condition checks, unreachable code, inconsistent state updates, logic errors, resource leaks, and type mismatches. Report suspicious code locations with detailed explanations, severity levels, and confidence assessments. Use when reviewing code for bugs, performing code audits, or when the user asks to find bugs, detect issues, analyze code for problems, or perform static analysis.

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。

Identifies bug-introducing commits using SZZ-style analysis based on bug-fixing commits, commit history, and code blame information. Use this skill when you need to trace bugs back to their origin, identify which commits introduced bugs, analyze bug-fix commits to find root causes, perform software repository mining for bug analysis, or conduct empirical studies on software defects. Triggers when users ask to find bug-introducing commits, identify when a bug was introduced, trace bug origins, perform SZZ analysis, or analyze bug-fixing commits.

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。

Analyze proof states in Isabelle or Coq and suggest applicable tactics to make progress. Use when users need help with: (1) Choosing the next tactic in an interactive proof, (2) Understanding what tactics apply to their current goal, (3) Getting unstuck in a proof, (4) Learning which tactics work for specific goal structures (conjunctions, implications, induction, etc.). Provides 3-5 ranked tactic suggestions with explanations for intermediate-level proofs in both Isabelle/Isar and Coq.

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。

Automatically reduces bug-triggering test cases to minimal form while preserving the failure. Use when debugging with large, complex test cases that need simplification, reproducing bugs with minimal examples, or creating regression tests from verbose failure scenarios. Takes a failing test and systematically removes unnecessary inputs, steps, assertions, and code using delta debugging and other reduction algorithms. Supports unit tests, integration tests, input files, and multiple programming languages (Python, JavaScript, Java, C/C++).

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。

Automatically simplify and minimize TLA+ specifications by reducing redundant state variables, merging equivalent actions, and minimizing invariants while preserving specified properties. Use when working with TLA+ specifications that need optimization, simplification, or reduction. Triggers when users ask to minimize, reduce, simplify, or optimize TLA+ specs, or when they want to remove redundancy from formal specifications while maintaining semantic equivalence.

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。

Automatically generates comprehensive unit tests for functions, classes, and modules. Use when you need to create tests for Python (pytest, unittest) or Java (JUnit, TestNG) code. Generates tests with comprehensive coverage including happy paths, edge cases, and error conditions. Analyzes existing test patterns in the codebase to match style and conventions. Supports mocking, parameterized tests, fixtures, and follows best practices for each framework.

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。

Guide for creating effective skills. This skill should be used when users want to create a new skill (or update an existing skill) that extends Claude's capabilities with specialized knowledge, workflows, or tool integrations.

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。

Detect semantic-level bugs by analyzing whether code behavior matches its intended purpose inferred from function/variable names, comments, docstrings, and documentation. Use when users need to: (1) Find logic errors where implementation contradicts stated intent, (2) Identify off-by-one errors and boundary mismatches, (3) Detect inverted logic or wrong operators, (4) Catch missing edge case handling, (5) Verify code matches its documentation. Highlights mismatches between intent and implementation across multiple programming languages.

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。

Systematic external reference searching across documentation, open-source repositories, and web resources. Use when working with unfamiliar libraries, APIs, or when needing production-quality implementation examples.

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。

Proposes secure remediation strategies for detected security vulnerabilities including buffer overflows, injection risks, insecure deserialization, improper authentication, and unsafe cryptographic usage. Provides recommended security checks, safer API alternatives, design-level changes, code examples, trade-off analysis, and prioritized remediation plans. Does NOT automatically modify code unless explicitly requested.

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。

Check behavioral consistency between high-level hardware specifications and RTL implementations. Use when asked to check RTL consistency, verify RTL against spec, check hardware specification compliance, validate RTL implementation, find spec violations in RTL, check behavioral consistency, or when working with hardware designs that need verification against protocol specifications, timing requirements, or functional specifications in Verilog, VHDL, or SystemVerilog.

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。

Creates structured context summaries for continuing work across AI sessions. Use when ending a session to enable seamless continuation in a new session without losing context.

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。

Generate systematic refinement steps from high-level specifications to concrete implementations in Isabelle/HOL or Coq, preserving correctness obligations at each step. Use when working with formal verification, program refinement, proof development, or when translating abstract specifications into executable code while maintaining formal guarantees. Supports data refinement (abstract types → concrete structures), algorithmic refinement (specifications → algorithms), and stepwise refinement with proof obligations.

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。

Hardware verification tool for checking functional equivalence between two RTL designs (Verilog). Use when users need to: (1) Verify if two RTL versions are functionally equivalent, (2) Compare original vs. refactored RTL code, (3) Validate design changes or optimizations, (4) Identify semantic vs. cosmetic differences, (5) Generate counterexamples for non-equivalent designs. Analyzes interface alignment, state variables, logic differences, and produces detailed equivalence verdicts with plain language explanations. Particularly effective for design verification, code reviews, and regression testing of RTL modifications.

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。

Generate concise, structured summaries of requirements for quick team understanding. Use when analyzing requirements from text documents (MD, TXT, DOCX) or technical specifications to create bullet-point summaries that highlight core functionality and dependencies/constraints. Ideal for sprint planning, stakeholder updates, team onboarding, or any situation requiring rapid comprehension of requirement documents.

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。

Iteratively enhance user requirements into clear, complete, actionable specifications through analysis and clarification. Use when: (1) Users provide initial requirements that need refinement, (2) Requirements are vague, incomplete, or ambiguous, (3) Creating formal specifications from informal descriptions, (4) Identifying missing constraints, edge cases, or acceptance criteria, (5) Clarifying assumptions and implicit dependencies, or (6) Preparing requirements for design, implementation, or verification. Operates interactively: analyze → ask clarifying questions → refine based on responses.

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 that design documents, code implementations, and tests fully cover all specified requirements. Use this skill when validating requirement traceability, conducting design reviews, assessing implementation completeness, checking test coverage against requirements, performing compliance audits, or identifying missing functionality. Produces coverage reports showing which requirements are satisfied, partially satisfied, or missing.

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。