606건 · 관련도순
Verify NowStack Mobile changes across web, iOS, Android, and Convex with real runtime evidence. Use for `/ns verify`, cross-surface regression checks, acceptance proof, or release verification.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when a user needs SCI/SCIE/ESCI/SSCI journal-submission help: evidence-backed candidate-journal discovery from a title, abstract, keywords, or manuscript text; public-metric and risk lookup for a known journal; or a pre-submission compliance check of a draft against a chosen journal's Author Guidelines and same-journal conventions. Also for Chinese requests such as 选刊、投稿期刊推荐、期刊查询、中科院分区、投稿前检查、期刊要求核对. This skill produces candidates, evidence, checks, and uncertainty; it does not judge research quality, predict acceptance, choose a uniquely best journal, draft prose, or simulate peer review.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Chinese journal matcher — performs L3 6-dimensional matching (keywords, cited direction, trend, solicitation, institution, cross-discipline), calculates conditional acceptance probability with review cycle estimation, and outputs tiered submission strategy (aspiration-stable-safety) using 4-layer weighted ranking.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
International journal matcher — performs L3 6-dimensional matching for SCI/SSCI/EI/Scopus journals, computes conditional acceptance probability with review cycle estimation, applies 4-layer weighted ranking, and outputs tiered submission strategy including CAS warning screening and Chinese scholar friendliness analysis.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when starting a new feature, product, or system design. Eliminates the spec-implementation gap by making specifications the primary artifact that drives code generation. Keywords: SDD, spec-driven, PRD, feature spec, user stories, implementation plan, specification, acceptance criteria, Given-When-Then.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Manage specification documents in .agent/specs/. Use when user provides requirements, acceptance criteria, or feature descriptions that need to be tracked and validated against implementation.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Phase 4.0 — Acceptance Criteria lock checkpoint before implementation. Consolidates all ACs from PRD, TechSpec, and Tasks, presents to user for confirmation, and saves the locked AC list to accepted-criteria.md. Implementation only starts after explicit user confirmation.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Write a feature spec or PRD from a problem statement or feature idea. Use when turning a vague idea or user request into a structured document, scoping a feature with goals and non-goals, defining success metrics and acceptance criteria, or breaking a big ask into a phased spec.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Use when creating /goal directives, reusable testable outcome-oriented success standards for agentic workflows. Use whenever the user asks to create a goal, write a /goal directive, define what good looks like, set success criteria for an agent, define a reusable instruction, create a quality standard, write acceptance criteria for an agent workflow, or specify done conditions.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
MATLAB testing, validation, and CI workflow for matlab.unittest, MATLAB Test, Simulink Test, coverage, artifact generation, GitHub Actions, and open-source reproducibility. Use whenever MATLAB work needs verification, regression tests, CI, GitHub publication, or acceptance criteria.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Refine Product Backlog Items to meet INVEST criteria. Write User Stories with Acceptance Criteria in Given/When/Then format, estimate with Story Points, and flag dependencies. Use before sprint planning when backlog items need grooming. Do not use to prioritize the backlog — that is the Product Owner's decision.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Turn ambiguous requests into an executable implementation plan with assumptions, sequence, acceptance checks, and rollback thinking.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Improve an existing skill or repository through isolated proposals, reproducible evaluation and evidence-based acceptance. Use for self-evolve or skill improvement.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Ask the minimum clarifying questions before implementing when scope, constraints, or success criteria are unclear. Use when a request has multiple plausible interpretations, missing acceptance criteria, or ambiguous environment constraints.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Auto-activates when analyzing GitHub issues to extract functional requirements, non-functional requirements, acceptance criteria, and user stories.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Prepare logical commits, publish through Pharos’s protected-main pull-request gate, monitor deployment, and hand off operational acceptance. Use only when commit, push, publish, release, or deployment watching is requested.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Draft or restructure research-paper sections, refine local prose, and audit manuscript-wide consistency. Use for evidence-grounded academic writing and revision, not independent acceptance-risk review or official rebuttal management.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Write a comprehensive product or engineering specification before implementation. Use when the user asks for `/spec`, PRDs, feature specs, API specs, refactor specs, acceptance criteria, user stories, edge cases, or open decision tracking before code is written.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Identify and exploit default or weak credentials on web application login forms, admin panels, CMS backends (WordPress wp-admin, Joomla, Drupal), and embedded device management interfaces. Signals include framework fingerprinting (WhatWeb, Wappalyzer, Nikto), exposed admin paths from robots.txt/dirbusting, and weak password policy acceptance of "Password1" or "123456". Tools: Burp Suite Intruder, Hydra, Medusa, OWASP ZAP.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
CORS misconfiguration allows attacker-controlled origins to read sensitive cross-origin responses when servers echo the `Origin` header in `Access-Control-Allow-Origin` or set it to `*` with `Access-Control-Allow-Credentials: true`. Detect via `Origin: https://attacker.com` reflection in `Access-Control-Allow-Origin` response header, wildcard `*` on credentialed endpoints, and null origin acceptance. Tools: OWASP ZAP, Burp Suite, manual `fetch()` with `credentials: include`.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Post-review intake closing skill. After an intake is resolved (whether accepted via review/meta PR merge or rejected/deferred at triage/evidence review), run this skill to post standardized, personalized closing comments on the PR (if any) and each intake issue. Comments include: evidence pipeline findings with /trust-appraise TM output, per-row artifact scores, decisions rationale, path-to-promotion/acceptance guidance, and a mandatory badge status note including the universal Powered by Gaia badge. Use after curation completes, before or immediately after merge for accepted intakes, or immediately upon rejection.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
The measurement surface for ALL Pulp DSP and audio-pipeline work — read it BEFORE writing or gating DSP, not only when something already sounds wrong. Covers the C++ harness (signal generators, metrics, assertions, RenderScenario, contracts), the offline Audio Doctor (magnitude/frequency response, THD/THD+N, phase/group delay), and their Python sibling the Audio Quality Lab (tools/audio/quality-lab — null residual + alignment, LTAS log-spectral distance, spectral flux/centroid, HNR, Theil-Sen drift slope, Kaiser-sinc resampling, license-guarded corpus, regression-net ratchet). TRIGGER on AUTHORING work — "build/design an oscillator/filter/synth/effect", "add a DSP module", "what should the acceptance gate be", "how do I measure aliasing / anti-aliasing / alias floor", "null against a reference", "is this DSP correct", "choose a tolerance", "golden/regression corpus for audio", "measure drift or jitter", "A/B two renders" — AND on DEBUGGING work — "is there sound / no audio / I hear nothing", "does this filter/compressor/synth/delay produce the right signal", "prove the DSP / prove the contract", "measure the frequency response", "what's the THD / is it distorting", "what's the group delay / phase response / measured latency", "magnitude response curve", "render a test tone and assert", "audio regression", "64-frame works but 128 is silent", "sample-rate change pitch-shifted it", "describe what's in this buffer", "audio doctor", "compare before/after a DSP refactor". Reach for this BEFORE hand-rolling any FFT, null test, alias measurement, pitch tracker, or golden-render script — most of it already exists in one of the two lanes. Test/tool layer over HeadlessHost — deterministic, no audio device, no speakers. Off the realtime thread entirely.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Judge whether a change made things better with demonstrable proxy measures tied to the mechanism it targets, not wall-clock time. Load before choosing acceptance measures for any before/after or A/B claim — CI and fleet speed-ups, build speed, DSP/audio quality, render fidelity. Each proxy names its data source, detection floor and sample size, and every zero is paired with a control on the same instrument.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
The acceptance bar for anything Pulp can install (a `pulp tool` registry entry, `pulp add` package, or any downloadable). Validate the FULL lifecycle — install AND uninstall, from OUTSIDE a Pulp checkout, with the installed-user's binary — before its README or docs ship. TRIGGER when adding/editing tools/packages/tool-registry.json, a new binary_download/python_pip/npm_package tool, a `pulp add` importer, or writing docs that tell users to install something.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.