572건 · 관련도순
Load this skill when configuring axe-core scans, reviewing automated accessibility test results, or writing tests that use @axe-core/playwright, @axe-core/react, or similar integrations. Provides a quick reference to axe 4.x rule IDs, their WCAG mapping, and default severity levels.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Review a GitHub pull request and provide structured feedback with severity ratings
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
GStack CSO method for broad infrastructure-first security posture review, threat areas, severity calibration, and safe remediation scope.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Comprehensive incident response framework from detection through resolution and post-incident review. Battle-tested SRE/DevOps practices: severity classification, timeline reconstruction, structured post-incident analysis. Use when declaring an incident, coordinating multi-team response during an outage, leading a post-mortem, or setting up on-call practices for a new service.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Creates structured bug reports for defects found during Oracle-to-PostgreSQL migration. Use when documenting behavioral differences between Oracle and PostgreSQL as actionable bug reports with severity, root cause, and remediation steps.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Front-end conventions review for Vue surfaces — the component-usage analog of /a11y, pointed at Nuxt UI 4 + crouton conventions instead of WCAG. Reviews just your diff (or a package/file) for v3 component names, the v4 overlay pattern, Options API, raw-HTML re-implementations, and hardcoded colors; rates findings by severity; and either comments inline on the PR (--comment) or applies the safe fixes for you (--fix). Steers the depth-aware `frontend-review` subagent. Use when asked to "check the frontend", "are we using Nuxt UI right", "review component usage", "frontend-review this", or run /frontend-review.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Accessibility review for Vue surfaces — the code-cleaning analog of /code-review and /simplify, pointed at WCAG/ARIA. Reviews just your diff (or a package/file), rates findings by severity, and either comments inline on the PR (--comment) or applies the safe fixes for you (--fix). Steers the depth-aware `a11y` subagent. Use when asked to "check accessibility", "a11y this", "audit ARIA/keyboard", or run /a11y.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
This skill should be used when creating bug/defect reports during system testing. Use this skill when you discover a bug, need to document test failures, or want to create comprehensive bug tickets with proper reproduction steps, severity assessment, and environment details. Guides users through interactive questioning to gather all necessary information and generates professional bug ticket documents in Markdown format. Supports Japanese (default) and English.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Review audit-related documents (control design documents, bottleneck analyses, requirements definitions, etc.) for quality, scoring them 0-100 with a severity-rated findings list. Use when reviewing audit documents, checking control design quality, or verifying cross-document consistency. Supports documents governed by US GAAP, IFRS, or J-GAAP.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Run technical quality checks across accessibility, performance, theming, responsive design, and anti-patterns. Generates a scored report with P0-P3 severity ratings and actionable plan. Use when the user wants an accessibility check, performance audit, or technical quality review.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Run technical quality checks across accessibility, performance, theming, responsive design, and anti-patterns. Generates a scored report with P0-P3 severity ratings and actionable plan. Use when the user wants an accessibility check, performance audit, or technical quality review.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Azure AI Content Safety SDK for Python. Use for detecting harmful content in text and images with multi-severity classification. Triggers: "azure-ai-contentsafety", "ContentSafetyClient", "content moderation", "harmful content", "text analysis", "image analysis".
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
This skill teaches security teams how to deploy and operationalize Amazon GuardDuty for continuous threat detection across AWS accounts and workloads. It covers enabling protection plans for S3, EKS, EC2 runtime monitoring, and Lambda, interpreting finding severity levels, and building automated response workflows using EventBridge and Lambda.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Build structured communication templates for malware incidents including stakeholder notifications, executive briefings, technical advisories, and regulatory disclosures with severity-based escalation procedures.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Implement a vulnerability aging dashboard and SLA tracking system to measure remediation performance against severity-based timelines and drive accountability.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Standalone security audit of a feature or file set: severity-ranked findings and remediation tasks.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Hostile, WordPress-specialized QA audit: severity-ranked findings, never a fix. Use for an adversarial audit.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Reviews the text and structure of a document, slide deck or web page against the accessibility rules the user supplies, or a default set covering heading structure, image alternative text, colour used as the only cue, link text, reading order, tables and language, and returns numbered findings with location, rule, severity and a ready-to-apply fix for the author, plus proposed alt text and a list of checks that need a tool or a person. Use when the user asks to "check this document for accessibility", "review the alt text in this deck", "is this page accessible", "run an accessibility check on these slides", "find accessibility issues before I publish" or "check my headings and link text". Do not use for brand or template compliance of slides, use branded-deck-builder instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Reviews one deal's notes and timeline (CRM opportunity record, activity log, emails, meeting notes, forecast entries) for risk signals such as a single contact thread, no identified budget owner, slipped or missing dates, silence after a proposal, an undefined decision process or a competitor named late, and returns a DRAFT risk register: each signal with the quoted evidence and its date, a severity on a stated scale, and one proposed next action with an owner role for the user to decide on. Use when the user asks to "review the risks on this deal", "why is this opportunity stalling", "is this deal single-threaded", "deal health check before the forecast call" or "what should we do next on <opportunity>". Do not use for a whole-account plan, use account-plan-builder instead; for scoring early leads against a rubric use lead-qualification-scorer. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Drafts a nonconformance report from inspection notes, test results and the governing specification or procedure: what was observed, where, the evidence with references, the requirement cited quoted verbatim with the departure from it, and containment proposals for the quality lead to decide. Never classifies severity, dispositions the item, names a root cause or closes the report. Use when the user asks to "write up this nonconformance", "draft an NCR from my inspection notes", "formalise this deviation" or "turn this snag into a defect report". Do not use for tracking the actions an NCR raises, use corrective-action-tracker instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Triages an incoming non-disclosure agreement against the organisation's written standard NDA positions and returns a DRAFT triage pack: a clause-by-clause deviations table with a severity band, a suggested response per clause quoted from the positions document, open questions and a governing-law flag, all for counsel to decide. Never gives legal advice or an acceptability call. Use when the user asks to "triage this NDA against our standard positions", "screen this confidentiality agreement before it goes to legal", "red-flag this mutual NDA", "first-pass the counterparty's NDA" or "is this NDA standard or does it need counsel". Do not use for a full review of an MSA, SOW, licence or any whole contract, use contract-review-pack instead; for one clause lined up across several documents, use clause-comparison-table. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Drafts a blameless incident postmortem (summary, impact, timeline, detection and response, contributing factors as candidates for review, action items) from an incident channel export, ticket notes and any alert or change records, with UNKNOWN for every fact the inputs do not contain. Never assigns blame, names a root cause or re-rates severity. Use when the user asks to "write the postmortem for this incident", "build the incident timeline from the chat export", "draft the post-incident review" or "turn this ticket and channel log into an incident report". Do not use for a knowledge article from the resolved ticket, use knowledge-article-drafter instead; for project retrospectives, use lessons-learned-synthesis; for data-breach impact and notification questions, use data-incident-impact-brief. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Reviews one SKILL.md against the format rules and returns a findings table: strict YAML front matter with exactly name and description, name equal to the folder, description as the trigger, the eight-heading skeleton, capability-neutral wording, safety boundaries. Each finding carries severity, rule identifier, location, quoted evidence and replacement text; the verdict READY, REVISE or BLOCKED is an apparent state and the owner decides. Use when the user asks to "review this SKILL.md", "check my skill file before upload", "lint this skill description", "validate the front matter of this skill" or "score this skill folder". Do not use to write an agent's instructions field, use agent-instructions-drafter instead; for injection or leakage exposures use agent-instructions-red-team; for launch tests use agent-evaluation-plan. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Reviews the instructions text and skills of a declarative agent, with its stated capabilities, knowledge sources and audience, for prompt-injection exposure, data-leakage paths, over-broad permissions and missing refusals, and returns an attack-surface map, a findings table with severity, quoted evidence and attack path, one pasteable fix per finding, a probe pack the owner can run and a refusal-coverage table. Use when the user asks to "red-team this agent", "check these instructions for prompt injection", "could this agent leak data", "review the permissions on my agent" or "what should this agent refuse". Do not use for checking a SKILL.md against the format rules, use skill-file-reviewer instead; do not use for designing the launch test set, use agent-evaluation-plan instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.