「tests」の検索結果

Change the public agent-facing CLI surface while preserving registry-backed discovery, JSON envelopes, aliases, docs, and tests.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Add or improve canonical data catalog collections, fields, aliases, relations, evidence tags, docs, and tests.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Work from a registered surface or transverse route by inspecting nodes, neighbors, edges, contracts, owners, tests, and gaps before editing.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Audit code, docs, tests, and registries against the Constitution, ADRs, and decision map without making broad repairs. Use when checking whether the repository is drifting away from accepted architecture.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Load when creating, updating, auditing, simplifying, routing, or validating `.agents/skills/*`, `SKILL.md` descriptions/resources, the skill schema, or skill-related agent context tests; not for ordinary application code or generic documentation.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Load for Blazor/MudBlazor component or page changes involving render modes, dialogs, parameters/events, HAL-gated actions, generated API clients or generated record consumption, theming, or component tests; add accessibility or CSS-isolation only when touched.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Load when asked to review a local diff/change set for correctness, regressions, blast radius, affected flows, and missing tests using the knowledge graph; use `review-pr` for intent/checklist/merge-gate evidence.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Load for pre-PR self-review or pull-request review that must verify the matched intent, allowed scope, required tests/docs, forbidden actions, architecture gates, and merge readiness; not for a general code-quality diff review alone.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Load for Blazor/MudBlazor UI changes involving forms, dialogs, focus, keyboard navigation, landmarks, ARIA, color contrast, RTL-safe styling, or WCAG 2.2 AA tests; not for backend-only changes.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Load when working on Tier 0 Sovereign (payments, money, orders), Tier 1 Security (auth, tenancy, migrations), or Tier 2 Privacy (PII, erasure) tasks to enforce advanced model tier, Invariant-Breaker adversarial tests, and zero-PII telemetry validation.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Scientific debugging for bugs, flakes, failures, and performance regressions. Use when something is broken, throwing, failing, slow, nondeterministic, or when the user says diagnose/debug this. Builds a trusted repro loop, tests falsifiable hypotheses, installs a regression oracle, and routes durable findings back into ln-* planning.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Comprehensive results analysis for empirical research: generate publication-quality descriptive statistics and balance tables, interpret regression coefficients with economic magnitude and effect sizes, assess identification assumption diagnostics, and produce structured results memos. Use when asked to create summary statistics, Table 1, balance tests, interpret results, assess economic significance, or write results narratives.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Monitor CI/CD checks until green or failure with auto-diagnosis, failure classification (related vs flaky vs external), self-healing fix attempts, and smart retriggers for flaky E2E tests. Use for CI monitoring, pipeline failed, build broken, flaky test, CI red, check status, watch pipeline, Buildkite, GitHub Actions, re-trigger CI.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Knowledge base from the NIST/SEMATECH e-Handbook of Statistical Methods (NIST HB 151) — the practical statistics reference for engineering, metrology, and quality. Use for: exploratory data analysis and the four univariate assumptions (4-plot); measurement process characterization including bias/precision, calibration designs, gauge R&R, and ISO/GUM uncertainty budgets; production process characterization (stability vs. capability); process modeling and regression (LS/WLS/NLS/LOESS); design of experiments (screening, fractional/factorial, response-surface, Taguchi); statistical process control (Shewhart/CUSUM/EWMA charts, capability indices, acceptance sampling); product/process comparisons (hypothesis tests and confidence intervals for 1/2/3+ groups, ANOVA, multiple comparisons); and reliability (lifetime & repair-rate models, accelerated testing, reliability growth). Scope limits: this is applied frequentist statistics for measurement and quality — it does NOT reproduce the per-distribution formula galleries, worked case studies, datasets, plot images, or Dataplot/R code of the original web Handbook (those are described, not copied); it is thin on modern machine learning, Bayesian methods beyond conjugate reliability priors, time-series/forecasting, and Bayesian experimental design.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Knowledge base from FAA-HDBK-006D (2020), the FAA's System Reliability, Maintainability, and Availability (RMA) Handbook for National Airspace System (NAS) hardware and software. Use for RMA figures of merit (MTBF, MTBO, MTTR, the availability variants), the bathtub curve and probability distributions, the four-stage RMA lifecycle mapped to the FAA Acquisition Management System (AMS), the six-task RMA technical-management/acquisition process, service-thread criticality and the NAS-RD severity-to-target table, the RMA analysis toolbox (RBD, FMEA/FMECA, FTA, Ishikawa, Monte Carlo, Bayesian, FRACAS, ALT, reliability-growth/recovery tests), software reliability (early prediction + reliability growth), and tailorable example RMA requirements for a Program Requirements Document. Scope limits: it is FAA/NAS-specific guidance (not a requirement, by its own statement), centred on hardware-plus-software availability — it brackets out human/service/facility/communications availability, names but does not reproduce the math derivations or external standards (MIL-STDs, IEEE 1633, RTCA DO-178C/DO-278A, SAE JA1011), is thin on detailed worked numerical examples and on safety-case method, and predates any current revision beyond 006D.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

How game development works as a process — roles, subtasks, workflows and role descriptions, especially (but not only) for Roblox. Use this skill when it's about the ORGANIZATION of game dev rather than concrete code: Which roles exist (Creative Director, Engineer, Artist, Polish/Audio, Business, QA-Tester, Game Critic)? Who does which subtask? What does a development chain (concept → backend → frontend → polish → test) look like? How do you write a Game Design Document / KONZEPT.md? How do several (AI) agents divide up a game? Also trigger on "plan a new game", "create Game Design Document", "which roles do I need for my game", "development workflow for a game", "who tests the game", "structure a game idea", "Roblox genre/monetization".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

8-phase development cycle: Feature requests, current state, functional planning, frontend, backend planning, backend code, tests, use cases. Iterative framework for systematic software development.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Prüfungsvorbereitung, Selbsttests, Probeklausuren und systematische Fehleranalyse.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Structured 6-step procedure for improving, renovating, or rebuilding existing pipelines, individual project folders, documentation structures, or software stacks. Addressable as "pipeline optimizer" (for whole topic pipelines, e.g. a software, research, or game-dev pipeline) or "project-folder optimizer" (for individual project folders within a pipeline, e.g. a single software tool or paper project). Triggers on tasks like "improve pipeline X", "optimize the stack", "rebuild Y", "renovation", "pipeline refactoring", "clean up project folder", "improve folder structure", "unify conventions", "documentation consolidation", "integrate into existing system", or any substantial intervention in established structures. Delivers building-stock analysis, purpose clarification, ideal sketch, gap plan, empirical pain-point identification, and retests with fresh subagents. Prevents parallel standards, duplication, and pipeline breaks.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Pre-tests one message (email, announcement, intranet post, town hall script, customer notice or slide) against two to six role personas the user supplies and returns a DRAFT panel report: each persona's likely first reaction, objections, unanswered questions, misreadings and what they would do next, every point tied to the passage that triggers it, plus suggested edits that add no fact the message does not already hold. Use when the user asks to "pre-test this message", "how will the team read this", "run this past the personas", "what objections will this raise", "find the holes before I send" or "check this lands with managers and field staff". Do not use for an in-character review of a proposal or business case by one executive archetype, use the executive-review family (cfo-reviewer, frontline-skeptic-reviewer and siblings) instead; to write the message in the first place, use announcement-drafter. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

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.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Builds a DRAFT quiz from the training content the user supplies (slide deck, manual, e-learning script, session transcript, procedure): numbered questions with the correct answer, distractors drawn from the content itself, an explanation quoting the source passage with its location, a difficulty tag (Recall, Apply, Analyse) with its basis, and a coverage table showing which sections and objectives each question tests and which are left uncovered. Use when the user asks to "build a quiz from this deck", "write knowledge check questions for this module", "create an assessment from this training", "test understanding of this procedure" or "which sections does this quiz cover". Do not use for a reader-facing question and answer page built from documents, use faq-builder instead; for writing the procedure itself from notes or a walkthrough, use sop-drafter. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Change a Mac's main display resolution in one command: real pixels instead of 4K HiDPI so remote desktop (AnyDesk), screen recording and Screenpipe stop lagging. Use when a remote session is slow or a lower or original resolution is needed: lists modes, picks by width, height, pixel width and refresh rate, self-tests five known traps, verifies after the change and prints a one-line rollback. Triggers: /display-mode, lower the resolution, set 1920x1080, AnyDesk is slow, restore resolution.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Map repository structure, likely tests, git state, and write scope before edits. Use when asked for repo mapping, blast radius, file inventory, or change planning.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。