'before' 검색 결과

Quick repo-hygiene and consistency checks before committing.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Run one bounded adversarial pass when the user explicitly requests a report-style stress test or ROSE identifies a concrete material loophole in an existing strategy, spec, plan, review, or claim; do not trigger for an interactive grill/frontier interview or merely before write-back, implementation, reconciliation, or completion.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Conduct one bounded evidence-grounded code review when the user explicitly requests review or ROSE names a concrete unresolved correctness/quality risk; do not trigger automatically after implementation, before every merge, for every bug fix/refactor, or as a completion gate.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Review a Go design spec before implementation begins - dispatch a subagent that checks a design doc for completeness, consistency, and idiomatic Go (simplicity, small consumer-defined interfaces, explicit wrapped errors, context propagation) plus Cobra/Viper conventions where applicable. Use when a user has a Go spec to review, asks "is this spec ready?", or is about to implement from a written design. Distilled from spf13/go-skills and adapted to this repo's conventions.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Optimizes CI/CD pipeline speed by implementing effective caching for dependencies, Docker layers, build outputs, and test results. Provides before/after performance metrics and best practices. Use for "CI caching", "pipeline optimization", "build speed", or "cache strategy".

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when a Spark branch or pull request needs final diff hygiene, validation selection, commit scope, remote topology, and readiness checked before publication.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when designing a Spark feature or writing or materially revising a design proposal that needs repository-first research, user input on unresolved key choices, and an owner-aligned implementation plan before code changes.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when a Spark change needs its authoritative owner, affected boundaries, risks, acceptance criteria, and smallest verifiable slice established before implementation or review.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use for the search-planning stage of a literature review, when database lanes and language layers must be chosen, when DOI coverage policy is unclear, or when inclusion and exclusion criteria need drafting before any source is read; not for running the screening and PRISMA pipeline of a formal review, which is prisma-scoping-review-pipeline.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use before a tag, GitHub release, or Zenodo archive, when README, CATALOG, CHANGELOG, CITATION.cff, the disclosure aggregate, and skill discovery must agree, or when a go or no-go release verdict needs recorded evidence behind it.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when authorship order, CRediT contribution roles, or AI-assistance attribution must be recorded transparently for a manuscript, when an author dispute needs an evidence trail, or before a contributorship statement is required at submission; this skill maintains the human-attribution ledger of who contributed what and in which role (authorship order, CRediT taxonomy, revision responsibilities), which is distinct from the disclosure-metadata audit owned by ai-disclosure-auditor.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when a complete research workflow — its instructions, skills, data boundaries, and tool connections — must be assessed for portability across AI agents or environments, so each component is explicitly mapped before migration rather than assumed to transfer.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when an ethics committee or IRB application involves AI anywhere in the pipeline, when KVKK, GDPR, or EU AI Act duties must be mapped to a study, or when consent and disclosure language about AI use needs drafting before submission.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when a construct, scale, or key term crosses Turkish and English and conceptual equivalence must be audited: translation and back-translation, construct drift, and culturally bound meaning, before measurement or cross-cultural claims.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when coding interviews, focus groups, or open-ended responses with AI assistance, when a codebook needs building or auditing, when intercoder reliability must be computed, or when qualitative quotes need integrity checks before publication.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when sources must stay traceable across sessions and years, when each reference needs a passport recording where it was found, how it was verified, and where it is cited, or when a draft needs a cited-but-unverified sweep before submission.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when selecting a statistical test with AI consultation, when assumptions need checking against the actual data, when an analysis plan or decision log must be written before running anything, or when results need APA-style reporting with effect sizes.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when a reference list needs APA 7 cleanup, when DOIs must be confirmed real against Crossref or PubMed, when the user asks whether AI-suggested citations actually exist, or when a manuscript needs a citation hygiene pass before submission or defense.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when choosing or configuring MCP servers for research work, when a literature, reference manager, or scholarly search server needs a trust check before installation, or when an existing research tool stack needs a data flow and permission audit.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when a study needs a preregistration or a frozen analysis plan, when confirmatory and exploratory analyses must be separated, or when every deviation from the registered plan must be logged before the result is reported.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Wi-Fi reconnaissance methodology — adapter selection, monitor mode and packet injection setup, regulatory domain handling, multi-band airspace mapping, hidden SSID discovery, BSSID/ESSID/channel/PMF/encryption fingerprinting, client probe analysis, vendor OUI lookup, war-driving with Kismet/airodump-ng/Wigle, and structured airspace data capture for downstream attacks. Use at the start of any wireless engagement to build the target map before active attacks; covers 2.4 GHz, 5 GHz, and 6 GHz (Wi-Fi 6E) bands and adapter compatibility for each.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use this skill BEFORE capturing any screenshot, exporting any HAR, or attaching any evidence to a bug-bounty submission. It catches the most common evidence-hygiene mistakes that cause cookies to leak, PII to be shared without consent, or screenshots to be unsuitable for triage.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Bug bounty report writing for H1/Bugcrowd/Intigriti/Immunefi — report templates, human tone guidelines, impact-first writing, CVSS 3.1 scoring, title formula, impact statement formula, severity decision guide, downgrade counters, pre-submit checklist. Validation gates and the submittability/always-rejected decision are owned by triage-validation; this skill owns the written report itself (templates, tone, formulas). Use after validating a finding and before submitting. Never use 'could potentially' — prove it or don't report.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Hunt TLS/SSL and DNS misconfigurations — missing HSTS (downgrade attack), weak cipher suites, expired/invalid certificates, mTLS bypass, missing SPF/DKIM/DMARC (email spoofing), DNS Zone Transfer (AXFR), dangling CNAME subdomain takeover, CAA records. Most of these are Info/Low on their own — this skill is opinionated about which findings actually pay (spoofable DMARC with delivered-to-inbox proof, AXFR returning internal hosts, dangling-CNAME takeover) versus which get rejected as best-practice noise (missing CAA, missing HSTS with no MitM position). Use during recon to find infrastructure weaknesses, and to TRIAGE them honestly before reporting.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.