'quality-assurance' 검색 결과

Coordinate a research project from topic exploration to a final manuscript. The skill connects research, writing, integrity checks, review, and revision workflows, tracks deliverables, and records progress with user confirmation at stage boundaries.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

• Taking a research topic through to a final manuscript
• Resuming a workflow from an existing draft or reviewer comments
• Tracking checks, revisions, and the paper creation process

Run one unattended iteration of the QUALITY-ASSURANCE loop — steward any in-flight QA PR, then build ONE queued `qa` issue (test infrastructure, unit tests, regression tests for known bugs) on a branch off auto-qa and open a PR that squash-merges on green CI. Adds tests and tooling only; never edits product source. Use when the user says "QAタスク", "next qa", "テストを進めて", or wants autonomous progress on the quality track.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Run one unattended IDEATION iteration of the quality-assurance loop — find the highest-value untested behavior in the codebase, judge it against the QA value bar, and file ONE locked `qa` issue specifying the test to write. Never writes code or tests; the next-qa skill builds from the queue this skill fills. Use when the user says "QAアイデア", "next qa idea", or wants the QA backlog refilled without implementation.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Perform the final submission-level audit of mathematical-modeling workflow integrity, evidence quality, anti-fabrication, paper coherence, figures, references, and contest readiness after consistency and completeness audits pass.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Seven-role depersonalised panel review of framework artefacts (KUD, criterion bank, LT definition, crosswalk, scope-and-sequence) in sequential-isolation mode. Gate rule mean>=88 AND no role<70.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Audit a proposed assessment for construct validity, reliability, and alignment to learning objectives. Use when reviewing or quality-assuring assessments before deployment.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Write or review manual Zephyr test cases with 1-condition-per-TC granularity, Module_Action on Screen when Condition naming, platform prefix rules, and High/Normal/Low priority classification. Use for test-case authoring and review; defer Jira traceability, linking, and pushing cases to Zephyr.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

强制审计论文生成质量，防止模型偷换、逻辑断链、内容空洞。Invoke when 用户提出检查/审计/验收/确保/verify/QA，或合并前需要把关。

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Python testing patterns with pytest, fixtures, TDD, mocking, async and integration tests. Use when writing or auditing a Python test suite.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Updates, generates, and validates tests using git-workspace context and TDD/BDD methodology. Use when code changes require new or updated test coverage.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Evaluate Claude Code rules in .claude/rules/. Use for frontmatter, globs, and quality audits.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Evaluate Claude skill quality through auditing. Use when reviewing or auditing skills.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

The systematic discipline of reviewing AI-generated and human-written marketing content for quality, accuracy, consistency, and effectiveness. This isn't proofreading—it's strategic quality control that catches issues before they damage brand, waste spend, or miss opportunities. In an era where AI can generate content at scale, QA becomes the bottleneck— and the moat. Speed without quality is just fast failure. Every piece of content is a brand promise, and QA ensures that promise is kept. Content QA operates at multiple levels: tactical (spelling, grammar), strategic (message alignment), technical (platform compliance), and brand (voice, tone). The best QA catches what the creator couldn't see because they were too close. Use when "review content, QA, quality check, proofread, check copy, content review, brand compliance, verify content, fact check, review before publish, content approval, final review, qa, content-review, quality-assurance, brand-compliance, proofreading, content-quality, review" mentioned.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Seven-role depersonalised panel review of framework artefacts (KUD, criterion bank, LT definition, crosswalk, scope-and-sequence) in sequential-isolation mode. Gate rule mean>=88 AND no role<70.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Audit a proposed assessment for construct validity, reliability, and alignment to learning objectives. Use when reviewing or quality-assuring assessments before deployment.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Conduct a GxP audit of computerized systems and processes. Covers audit planning, opening meetings, evidence collection, finding classification (critical/major/minor), CAPA generation, closing meetings, report writing, and follow-up verification. Use for scheduled internal audits, supplier qualification audits, pre-inspection readiness assessments, for-cause audits triggered by deviations or data integrity concerns, or periodic compliance posture reviews of validated systems.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

QA validation and fix loop workflow — validates implementation completeness then iterates fix cycles until all acceptance criteria pass and quality gates clear

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Independent LLM judge evaluates task completion separately from the executing agent, catching false success claims by reviewing task goal, actions taken, final state, and evidence. Produces PASS/FAIL with confidence score and reasoning.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Systematically QA test a web application and fix bugs found. Runs QA testing, then iteratively fixes bugs in source code, committing each fix atomically and re-verifying. Use when asked to "qa", "QA", "test this site", "find bugs", "test and fix", or "fix what's broken". Proactively suggest when the user says a feature is ready for testing or asks "does this work?". Three tiers: Quick (critical/high only), Standard (+ medium), Exhaustive (+ cosmetic). Produces before/after health scores, fix evidence, and a ship-readiness summary.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

ドキュメント要件分析: docs/ フォルダ内のコンセプトおよび要件ドキュメントを分析し、現在のコードと照らし合わせて要件を検証し、統合差異レポートを作成します。

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Análisis de requisitos de documentos: Analiza los documentos de concepto y requisitos en la carpeta docs/, verifica los requisitos con el código actual y crea un informe de diferencias consolidado.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Анализ требований к документации: Анализирует документы концепций и требований в папке docs/, проверяет требования на соответствие текущему коду и создает консолидированный отчет об отклонениях.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

文档需求分析：分析 docs/ 文件夹中的概念与需求文档，针对当前代码检查需求，并生成整合的差异报告。

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Barrido sistemático de errores con un valor objetivo escalado a la base de código, escalado por duplicación, seguimiento de áreas y verificación final. Se utiliza al ejecutar /bugsweep o cuando el usuario solicita una revisión sistemática de errores.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.