'invariants' 검색 결과

Automatically generate TLA+ specifications from source code (C/C++, Python) for formal verification of distributed systems. Use when users need to: (1) Generate TLA+ specs from program implementations, (2) Model distributed systems, consensus protocols, or concurrent algorithms, (3) Extract state variables, actions, and invariants from code, (4) Create formal specifications for model checking with TLC, (5) Verify safety and liveness properties of distributed systems. Particularly effective for message-passing systems, replication protocols, consensus algorithms, and distributed transactions.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

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.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Automatically infer formal correctness properties from Verilog/SystemVerilog RTL code and generate SystemVerilog Assertions (SVA). Identifies control-flow invariants (mutual exclusion, valid-ready handshakes, pipeline ordering, safety properties), liveness expectations, and temporal properties. Use when working with RTL designs that need formal property generation, when adding assertions to existing RTL, or when users ask to infer properties, generate assertions, or create formal specifications from hardware designs.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Automatically derives TLA+ properties (invariants, safety, liveness) from natural-language requirements or structured requirement documents. Resolves ambiguities, asks clarifying questions for underspecified requirements, and outputs TLA+-compatible property definitions with semantic explanations. Use when translating system requirements, specifications, or behavioral constraints into formal TLA+ temporal logic properties for verification with TLC model checker.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Generate Isabelle or Coq proofs establishing partial or total correctness of imperative programs from code and formal specifications. Use when users need to: (1) Prove program correctness using Hoare logic, (2) Generate verification conditions from pre/postconditions, (3) Construct loop invariants and termination arguments, (4) Verify imperative programs with assignments, conditionals, and loops. Supports both partial correctness (if terminates, postcondition holds) and total correctness (terminates and postcondition holds) for both Isabelle/HOL and Coq.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Verify that interface and class contracts (preconditions, postconditions, invariants) are preserved across program versions. Use when validating refactorings, checking API compatibility, verifying design-by-contract implementations, or ensuring behavioral contracts remain intact after code changes. Automatically detects contract violations, identifies affected methods and classes, and provides actionable guidance for resolving violations while maintaining program correctness.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Explain why counterexamples violate specifications by analyzing formal specifications (temporal logic, invariants, pre/postconditions, code contracts), informal requirements (user stories, acceptance criteria), test specifications (assertions, property-based tests), and providing step-by-step traces showing state changes, comparing expected vs actual behavior, identifying root causes, and assessing violation impact. Use when debugging test failures, understanding model checker output, explaining runtime assertion violations, analyzing static analysis warnings, or teaching specification concepts. Produces structured markdown explanations with traces, comparisons, state diagrams, and cause chains. Triggers when users ask why something failed, explain a violation, understand a counterexample, debug a specification, or analyze why a test fails.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Create ACSL (ANSI/ISO C Specification Language) formal annotations for C/C++ programs. Use this skill when working with formal verification, adding function contracts (requires/ensures), loop invariants, assertions, memory safety annotations, or any ACSL specifications. Supports Frama-C verification and generates comprehensive formal specifications for C/C++ code.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Automatically complete partial code snippets while satisfying semantic constraints including variable types, invariants, pre/post-conditions, interface contracts, and expected input/output behavior. Use when users provide incomplete code with specific requirements like "complete this function that takes a list and returns sorted unique elements" or "fill in this method body that must maintain the invariant that x stays positive" or "implement this interface method with these type constraints." Produces compilable, executable code with tests and a constraint satisfaction report.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Apply a disciplined engineering workflow to any code change. Use whenever implementing a feature, fixing a bug, or refactoring — before writing code, not after. Walks orient → baseline → smallest change → test → verify → self-review, and enforces language-agnostic hard gates (don't mass-reformat, keep the linter and type-checker clean, keep the build and tests green, make interface changes additive, protect security invariants).

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Think and work like an expert Computer Scientist. Use when a task calls for Computer Scientist judgment. Reasons from computational models, abstraction contracts, invariants, and measurable complexity through CLRS-grade algorithm analysis, impossibility results (FLP, CAP, NP-hardness), property-based and chaos testing, and formal tools (TLA+, Coq, Z3) while treating partial failure, race conditions, label leakage, and abstraction leaks like GC pauses and clock skew as first-class failure modes.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Jeff Bezos 视角. Amazon 创始人 / 前 CEO, 1997-2020 致股东信 24 封 + Working Backwards 内部机制的结构化镜片. 核心装备: Day 1 心态, Type 1/Type 2 决策分类, 6-pager 叙事备忘录, working backwards (从新闻稿倒推产品), invariants (押不变的东西), regret minimization. 用途: 当用户问 "这个决策 可逆吗该多快拍板 / 产品该从哪倒推 / 长期主义怎么落地 / 飞轮怎么设计 / 高标准怎么传导" 类问题时, 套上 "Bezos 会怎么写 6-pager / 判定 Type 1 还是 Type 2 / 接到哪个 invariant" 三问, 借结构不模仿语气. 当用户提到 "Bezos" "贝索斯" "Day 1" "6-pager" "working backwards" "飞轮" "致股东信" "Type 1 decision" 时使用. 即使用户只是说 "用 Amazon 思路看一下" 也应触发.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Domain-driven modeling patterns for Axone contracts. Use when introducing domain concepts, encoding invariants, or deciding boundaries between domain, handlers, services, gateways, queries, and state.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when adding or changing tuning values, items, enemies, abilities or levels - put them in the engine's data assets (ScriptableObject, Resource, DataAsset/DataTable, JSON/RON) with validation and stable IDs, keep runtime state out of shared data, inject services instead of singletons, and test data invariants.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when modelling a rich domain in Java - SOLID principles, encapsulated entities that enforce their own invariants, and value objects over primitives

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Set up first-pass for a main folder that holds many repos, or for one repo. In a main folder it writes one set of working rules at the root that every session loads, a workspace map, and a section in each repo with that repo's real commands, test limits and invariants, and it lists each repo's own hooks so first-pass can run them from the main folder. In one repo it writes the rules and the section into that repo. Use when asked to set up, install, add, update or re-run first-pass, to "add the shipping rules", or when the start-of-session check says something drifted. Re-run to update.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

The methods a financial-ML result has to survive before it is evidence — purged cross-validation with an embargo, triple-barrier labelling, sample uniqueness under overlapping labels, fractional differentiation, meta-labelling, and multiple-testing correction. Written because the invariants were required of quant-researcher and nothing in the project explained how to satisfy them: a rule without a method produces either an invention or a block. Applied whenever a backtest, a feature or a label is being designed or judged.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Designs or reviews relational, document, key-value, graph, or search data models with ownership, invariants, access paths, migrations, consistency, retention, privacy, and recovery behavior. Use for schema changes, new data stores, indexes, migrations, persistence boundaries, or query-driven design. Not for a query-only bug without a model change or for API contract design.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Produce the architecture: a lean spine of invariants that keeps everything built from it consistent, projected into whatever format the work needs. Use when the user says "create the architecture", "create technical architecture", "architecture spine", or "create a solution design".

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Cross-file invariants for surface streaming members — the retry fence, server snapshot-then-deltas, and the captured-input hazard. Use when touching any streaming member in the client, server, or common packages.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

The alphabetical-sort invariants the hyperlane-registry CI / CodeRabbit enforces on warp route YAML (deploy.yaml and config.yaml) — top-level chain entries sorted by chain name, and keys within each entry in strict alphabetical order — plus the canonical per-file key orderings and a verification pass. Referenced by any warp deploy/update skill that writes or edits a registry YAML file.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Proof writing and verification techniques for mathematical reasoning. Covers 13 proof strategies with canonical worked examples — direct, contrapositive, contradiction, cases, WLOG, vacuous/trivial, biconditional, counterexample, existence (constructive and non-constructive), uniqueness, induction (weak, strong, structural), pigeonhole/double-counting, and diagonal argument/invariants. Use when writing, verifying, or selecting proof strategies for any mathematical claim.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Compare explicit design/specification contracts with the implementation in a defined change scope. Use to verify signatures, types, schemas, invariants, and other stated contracts without expanding into general code quality review.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

fast-check patterns for JS/TS — 6 canonical property categories with worked examples targeting agent-studio utilities (path normalization, safe-json, glob-to-regex, routing logic)

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.