292건 · 관련도순
Remove dead code, unused imports, fix lint warnings, and normalize formatting across a codebase without changing business logic or architecture. Use when lint warnings have piled up during rapid development, unused imports and variables clutter files, dead code paths were never removed, formatting is inconsistent, or static analysis tools report fixable hygiene issues.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Strategic SEO planning for new or existing websites. Industry-specific templates, competitive analysis, content strategy, and implementation roadmap. Use when user says "SEO plan", "SEO strategy", "content strategy", "site architecture", or "SEO roadmap".
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Security architecture and threat modeling. OWASP Top 10 2025 analysis, OWASP Agentic AI Top 10 (ASI01-ASI10), AI/LLM security patterns, supply chain security, modern API authentication (OAuth 2.1, DPoP, Passkeys/WebAuthn), vulnerability assessment, and security review for code and infrastructure.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Prospective failure analysis using Gary Klein's pre-mortem technique. Assumes complete failure, works backward to identify risks, leading indicators, and circuit breakers. Counters optimism bias by forcing systematic exploration of failure modes before they materialize. Use for project plans, architecture decisions, technology adoption, business strategy, or feature launches. Triggers on "리스크", "위험", "실패하면", "swing-mortem", "뭐가 잘못될 수 있어", "risk", "what could go wrong", "걱정되는 점", "failure modes", "리스크 분석", "위험 분석".
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Devil's Advocate stress-testing for code, architecture, PRs, and decisions. Surfaces hidden flaws through structured adversarial analysis with metacognitive depth. Use for high-stakes review, stress-testing choices, or when the user wants problems found deliberately. NOT for routine code review. Triggers on "스트레스 테스트", "stress test", "devil's advocate", "반론", "이거 괜찮아", "문제 없을까", "깊은 리뷰", "critical review", "adversarial".
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
This skill should be used to spawn specialized OpenAI Codex CLI subagents for code review, debugging, architecture analysis, security audits, refactoring, documentation, comparative evidence adjudication, and autonomous /goal runs. It adds each persona through process-local developer instructions while preserving the project's AGENTS.md chain, including during parallel launches. Supports GPT-6-Astra across low, medium, high, xhigh, max, and ultra reasoning with default or priority service tiers, plus GPT-5.6 and GPT-5.5 models. Triggers on 'delegate to Codex', 'Codex Astra', 'Astra subagent', 'Codex subagent', 'code review agent', 'security audit', 'refactor with Codex', 'goal run', 'autonomous goal', 'have Codex weigh this'.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Run Phase 1a (behavioral specification) and Phase 1b (verification architecture) for the active VCSDD feature. Invokes vcsdd-builder to write EARS-format requirements and purity boundary analysis.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Generate draw.io editable diagrams (.drawio, .drawio.svg) from text, images, or Excel. Orchestrates 3-agent workflow (Analysis → Manifest → SVG generation) with quality gates. Use when creating architecture diagrams, flowcharts, sequence diagrams, or converting existing images to editable format. Supports Azure/AWS cloud icons. Triggers on draw.io, drawio, ダイアグラム, アーキ図, フローチャート, シーケンス図.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
React Native performance profiling, optimization, and monitoring - JS/UI thread analysis, re-render prevention, list optimization, image performance, bundle size, startup time, memory leaks, React Compiler, New Architecture benefits
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
White-box source code security review structured around OWASP ASVS 5.0 (427 verification requirements across 16 chapters). Reads and understands application source code to build a security-aware knowledge base that enriches all downstream skills. Covers: tech stack identification, route/endpoint mapping, authentication and authorization architecture, dangerous function patterns, source-to-sink data flow tracing, IaC review, dependency analysis, ASVS compliance mapping, and LLM integration security (prompt injection, tool abuse, output handling, RAG poisoning, MCP server patterns). When LLM/AI framework usage is detected, automatically reviews OWASP LLM Top 10 patterns from source code and chains into /ai-redteam with white-box context for live endpoint testing. Chains into /pentester, /threat-modeling, /web-exploit, /api-security, /cloud-security, /analyze-cve, /credential-audit, and /ai-redteam — providing white-box context that transforms black-box testing into targeted, informed assessment.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Full ASVS 5.0 compliance assessment against a codebase and/or architecture diagrams. Reads all 346 controls from the companion CSV, performs targeted code analysis per control, and produces a complete matrix marked COMPLIANT / NON_COMPLIANT / NOT_RELEVANT — with per-control reasoning and evidence (code snippets, file:line references, diagram observations). Outputs a reviewed CSV matrix and a self-contained HTML evidence report.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Reverse engineers ARM/AArch64 malware by identifying the architecture and instruction set state (ARM/Thumb), parsing ELF/Mach-O ARM headers, and orienting analysis around the ARM calling convention. Activates for requests to reverse ARM binaries, analyze AArch64 malware, or handle ARM/Thumb instruction-set decoding.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Guideline for designing, implementing, and verifying secure Python applications following OWASP Top 10 best practices. Use when the user wants to: (1) review Python code for security vulnerabilities, (2) design a secure Python application architecture, (3) implement security features (authentication, authorization, cryptography, input validation), (4) audit Python dependencies for known vulnerabilities, (5) create security checklists or verification plans, (6) fix security bugs or harden existing Python code, (7) set up security testing and static analysis (bandit, safety, semgrep), or (8) handle any Python security concern including injection prevention, secure deserialization, SSRF protection, secrets management, and secure deployment.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Guideline for designing, implementing, and verifying secure TypeScript and JavaScript applications following OWASP Top 10 best practices. Use when the user wants to: (1) review TypeScript or JavaScript code for security vulnerabilities, (2) design a secure Node.js, Deno, or browser application architecture, (3) implement security features (authentication, authorization, cryptography, input validation), (4) audit npm/yarn/pnpm dependencies for known vulnerabilities, (5) create security checklists or verification plans, (6) fix security bugs or harden existing TypeScript or JavaScript code, (7) set up security testing and static analysis (ESLint security plugins, Semgrep, Snyk), or (8) handle any TypeScript/JavaScript security concern including injection prevention, prototype pollution, XSS protection, SSRF prevention, secrets management, and secure deployment.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Systematic technical debt analysis across architecture, testing, documentation, and infrastructure. Investigates the codebase, scores findings by impact and effort, and generates a prioritized TECH_DEBT.md remediation plan. Delegates to specialized skills for code quality (scout) and linting (lint-fix). Use when assessing overall project health, planning cleanup sprints, or onboarding to an unfamiliar codebase.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Strategic SEO planning for new or existing websites. Industry-specific templates, competitive analysis, content strategy, and implementation roadmap. Use when user says "SEO plan", "SEO strategy", "SEO planning", "content strategy", "keyword strategy", "content calendar", "site architecture", or "SEO roadmap".
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Apply the Fable-derived 10-stage OBSERVE, OBSERVE, LISTEN, THINK, CONNECT, CONNECT, FEEL, ACCEPT, CREATE, GROW loop to consequential or ambiguous reasoning and decisions. Use for think this through, deep think, architecture review, postmortem, tradeoff analysis, or challenges to assumptions. This is a reasoning review, not a deterministic vault health check or repair workflow.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use this skill when building, reviewing, or refreshing a RACI (Responsible / Accountable / Consulted / Informed) matrix for a Salesforce project so that every Salesforce-specific decision — data model change, automation tier choice, security model, integration boundary, deployment, license/edition — has exactly one accountable owner and a documented escalation path that downstream agents can route to. Trigger keywords: RACI matrix salesforce project, stakeholder authority salesforce, escalation path salesforce decisions, who approves data model change, salesforce decision rights, REFUSAL_NEEDS_HUMAN_REVIEW routing. NOT for the change advisory board operating model itself (use admin/change-management-and-deployment). NOT for end-user training rollout plans (use admin/change-management-and-training). NOT for the technical mechanics of permission set assignment authority (use admin/permission-set-architecture). NOT for pure stakeholder requirements elicitation (use admin/requirements-gathering-for-sf). More trigger keywords: who approves a sandbox refresh, who signs off a data load, release update activation owner, delegated admin authority vs RACI, multi-org decision rights, escalation time-box.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Build face recognition systems with InsightFace, ArcFace, enrollment pipelines, HDBSCAN clustering, and privacy-compliant architecture. Activate on: face recognition, face enrollment, face clustering, identity verification, facial search. NOT for: general object detection (computer-vision-pipeline), emotion analysis (ai-engineer).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Data structures and algorithms for AI agent episodic memory. Covers vector stores (HNSW, IVF, PQ), temporal indexing, knowledge graphs with triple stores, hierarchical summarization, forgetting curves, working/long-term/ procedural memory, and memory consolidation. Deep analysis of MemGPT/Letta, Zep/Graphiti, Mem0, and the Stanford generative agents memory architecture. Teaches the CS fundamentals behind how agents remember, retrieve, and forget. Activate on: "agent memory", "episodic memory", "vector search algorithm", "HNSW", "memory retrieval", "forgetting curve", "knowledge graph memory", "MemGPT", "Letta", "Zep", "Mem0", "memory consolidation", "temporal retrieval", "agent long-term memory", "memory layer". NOT for: conversation protocol design (use agent-conversation-protocols), agent infrastructure selection (use agentic-infrastructure-2026), building RAG pipelines (use ai-engineer).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Analyze hierarchical DAG-like systems by separating undirected substrate from ordering metadata, then classifying diamonds, mixers, shortcuts, and hidden cycle structure. Use for workflow architecture, citation or genealogy DAG comparison, and information-flow diagnosis. NOT for ordinary cycle detection in arbitrary graphs, one-node runtime debugging, or systems with no real ordering constraint.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Choose multi-agent architectures using environment-first analysis, coordination pressure, commitment tuning, and knowledge levels. Use for autonomy design, protocol choice, and coordination failures. NOT for single-agent planning, centralized schedulers, or prompt-only swarms.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Fits structural equation models to GWAS summary statistics using GenomicSEM (Grotzinger 2019), including common-factor models, confirmatory factor models, ESEM, common-factor GWAS with Q_SNP heterogeneity, multivariate Wald tests, and stratified GenomicSEM partitioned heritability. Reconciles results against MTAG multi-trait analysis. Handles sample overlap via the LDSC sampling-covariance matrix, identifies and resolves Heywood cases, and verifies model fit with CFI / RMSEA. Use when modeling latent genetic architecture across correlated traits, running multivariate GWAS on a shared factor, distinguishing factor-mediated from trait-specific SNP effects, or comparing GenomicSEM common-factor results against MTAG when both depend on accurate sampling covariance.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Multi-agent collaboration bringing 2-4 perspectives into one discussion for architecture decisions and trade-off analysis. Use for 'should we X or Y', design review, or debate before deciding.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.