「cause」の検索結果

Template for skills that integrate with an MCP server. Demonstrates the reference file pattern: Claude reads a domain-specific MCP cheatsheet before making any tool calls, reducing query failures caused by server-specific gotchas. Fork this skill and replace the Sentry example with your target MCP.

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。

This skill should be used when the user wants to "run an evaluation", "evaluate my agent", "evaluate my ADK agent", "write an eval dataset", "analyze eval failures", "compare eval results", "optimize agent", or needs guidance on the Gemini platform eval methodology and the Quality Flywheel. Covers eval metrics, dataset schema, LLM-as-judge scoring, and common failure causes. Applies to any agents-cli project, whatever framework the agent is written in. Do NOT use for agent API code patterns (ADK: use google-agents-cli-adk-code), deployment (use google-agents-cli-deploy), or project scaffolding (use google-agents-cli-scaffold).

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 to run a non-trivial change end to end with the CCG role tools (ccg_analyze / ccg_design / ccg_build / ccg_debug / ccg_optimize / ccg_review / ccg_test) and the verify-* quality gates. Use when a task is a whole feature, a refactor, a bug whose cause is not yet known, or any change large enough that one straight-through attempt would be a guess.

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。

Author and review GitHub Actions workflow YAML safely so syntactically-valid YAML can't ship a workflow that GitHub Actions refuses to run. USE FOR: editing, adding, or reviewing any file under .github/workflows/, writing run-name/name/if/env/run values that contain ${{ }} expressions, diagnosing a run that fails with 'This run likely failed because of a workflow file issue' and no jobs starting, deciding when a workflow scalar must be quoted, validating workflows with actionlint. DO NOT USE FOR: authoring application YAML unrelated to GitHub Actions, Azure Pipelines, GitLab CI, or non-workflow YAML. SCOPE: this skill covers *syntactic/structural* correctness of workflow YAML (quoting, parsing, actionlint); for *semantic and functional* workflow design (what a workflow should do, agentic-workflow behavior), see .github/agents/agentic-workflows.agent.md — the two are complementary. INVOKES: actionlint (downloaded pinned binary) plus git/grep for inspection.

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。

Validates custom dotnet new templates for correctness before publishing. Catches missing fields, parameter bugs, shortName conflicts, constraint issues, and common authoring mistakes that cause templates to fail silently. USE FOR: checking template.json files for errors before publishing or testing, diagnosing why a template doesn't appear after installation, reviewing template parameter definitions for type mismatches and missing defaults, finding shortName conflicts with dotnet CLI commands, validating post-action and constraint configuration. DO NOT USE FOR: finding or using existing templates (use template-discovery), creating projects from templates (use template-instantiation), creating templates from existing projects (use template-authoring).

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。

Guide for optimizing MSBuild incremental builds. USE FOR: builds slower than expected on subsequent runs, 'nothing changed but it rebuilds anyway', diagnosing why targets re-execute unnecessarily, fixing broken no-op builds. Covers 8 common causes: missing Inputs/Outputs on custom targets, volatile properties in output paths (timestamps/GUIDs), file writes outside tracked Outputs, missing FileWrites registration, glob changes, Visual Studio Fast Up-to-Date Check (FUTDC) issues. Key diagnostic: look for 'Building target completely' vs 'Skipping target' in binlog. DO NOT USE FOR: first-time build slowness (use build-perf-baseline), parallelism issues (use build-parallelism), evaluation-phase slowness (use eval-performance), non-MSBuild build systems.

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。

Complete reference for 26 web2 bug classes with root causes, detection patterns, bypass tables, exploit techniques, and real paid examples. Covers IDOR, auth bypass, XSS (postMessage), SSRF (11 IP bypass techniques), SQLi, business logic, race conditions, OAuth/OIDC, file upload (10 bypass techniques), GraphQL, LLM/AI (ASI01-ASI10, MCP/RAG attacks), API misconfig (mass assignment, JWT, prototype pollution, CORS), ATO (9 paths), SSTI, subdomain takeover, cloud misconfig, HTTP smuggling, cache poisoning, MFA bypass (7 patterns), SAML attacks, error disclosure, CSS injection, LFI/RCE, insecure deserialization, dependency confusion, padding oracle. Use when hunting a specific vuln class or studying what makes bugs pay.

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。

External recon for software supply-chain attack surface — package-namespace squatting candidates, dependency-confusion vulnerabilities, GitHub Actions injection openings, container image registry exposure, SBOM mining, internal-package-name leakage, and CI/CD configuration exposure. Reconnaissance and identification ONLY — actual package publishing / typosquat attacks are EXTERNAL-OFFENSIVE and require explicit written sign-off because they can affect the entire npm/PyPI ecosystem. Use when the target has a public GitHub org, when their build artifacts/SBOMs are reachable, when their docker images are on Docker Hub/GHCR, or when you find internal package names in their JS bundles.

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。

Red-team operator discipline — the mindset corrections that separate offensive testing from defensive WAPT. Built from authorized red-team work where conservative defaults caused multiple findings to be missed and one to be incorrectly retracted. Use at the START of any red-team engagement and again whenever feeling stuck or considering "stopping" on a defended target. The single most important skill to load when scope is "external red team" not "bug bounty / WAPT".

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。

Hunt HTTP request smuggling (CL.TE, TE.CL, H2.CL, H2.TE). Cause: front-end proxy and back-end server disagree on where one request ends and the next begins (Content-Length vs Transfer-Encoding header parsing inconsistency). CL.TE: front-end uses CL, back uses TE → smuggle by sending TE: chunked but with body that fits CL count. TE.CL: opposite. H2.CL: HTTP/2 downgrade, smuggle CL into HTTP/1.1 back-end. Detection tools: Burp HTTP Request Smuggler extension, smuggler.py, h2csmuggler. Confirm: time-delay technique (smuggled GET with 30s timeout) — if front-end returns slow on next victim request, smuggling works. Validate: cache poisoning chain (smuggle request that gets cached for victim), credential theft (smuggle X-Forwarded-For override that captures next user's cookies), bypass auth (smuggled internal-path request). Real paid examples from major CDN deployments. Use when hunting H1 paid programs running CDN+origin stacks, when targeting load balancer / WAF bypass.

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。

This skill should be used when the user asks to "identify web application vulnerabilities", "explain common security flaws", "understand vulnerability categories", "learn about injection attacks", "review access control weaknesses", "analyze API security issues", "assess security misconfigurations", "understand client-side vulnerabilities", "examine mobile and IoT security flaws", or "reference the OWASP-aligned vulnerability taxonomy". Use this skill to provide comprehensive vulnerability definitions, root causes, impacts, and mitigation strategies across all major web security categories.

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。

Causal inference framework for answering "does X cause Y?" beyond correlation. DoWhy (Microsoft Research) provides the identify-estimate-refute loop: define a causal graph (DAG), identify the causal effect using backdoor/frontdoor/instrumental variable criteria, estimate treatment effects with multiple estimators, and validate results with automated refutation tests. Use when: distinguishing causation from correlation, estimating treatment effects (ATE, ATT, CATE), designing and analyzing A/B tests with confounders, using instrumental variables, performing counterfactual reasoning ("what would have happened if..."), validating causal claims with sensitivity analysis, working with observational data where randomization is impossible, or any analysis where the question is "what is the CAUSAL effect of X on Y" rather than just "how do X and Y relate?"

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。

Classical end-to-end empirical analysis workflow in the traditional Stata ecosystem — native Stata + reghdfe + ivreg2 + csdid + did_imputation + eventstudyinteract + sdid + rdrobust + rddensity + synth + synth_runner + psmatch2 + teffects + ebalance + coefplot + esttab + asdoc + binscatter. **Defaults to economics empirical-paper style** (AER / QJE / AEJ) — every run produces a publication-ready output set with a multi-column regression table (M1→M6 progressive controls/FE) as the centerpiece, plus Table 1 (descriptives), mechanism / heterogeneity / robustness tables, and event-study + coefficient + trend figures. Covers the full 8-step Stata pipeline an applied economist runs on every paper — (1) data import & cleaning (use/import, destring, misstable, duplicates, merge assert), (2) variable construction (gen/egen/winsor2/xtile/xtset with L./F./D.), (3) descriptive statistics & Table 1 (tabstat/balancetable/asdoc), (4) classical diagnostic tests (sktest/swilk/hettest/imtest/xtserial/xttest3/vif/dfuller/kpss/hausman/estat overid), (5) baseline modeling (reg/xtreg/reghdfe/ivreg2/ivregress/csdid/did_imputation/eventstudyinteract/sdid/rdrobust/synth/psmatch2/teffects/heckman/qreg/ppmlhdfe), (6) robustness battery (bacondecomp/honestdid/rwolf/ritest/wildbootstrap/oster), (7) further analysis (subgroup/triple-diff/interactions/medsem/marginsplot/binscatter by group), (8) publication-ready tables & figures (esttab/outreg2/estout/coefplot/marginsplot/rdplot/twoway combined). **Also covers two parallel domain modes that share the same 8-step scaffolding** — **Mode A — Epidemiology / public health** (target-trial emulation, IPTW + g-formula + TMLE doubly-robust triplet via `teffects ipw` / `teffects ipwra` / `teffects aipw` / `eltmle`, Mendelian randomization via `mrrobust` (IVW / Egger / weighted median) and `mregger` / `mrpresso`, KM / Cox / AFT / RMST survival via `sts` / `stcox` / `streg` / `strmst2`, E-value sensitivity via `evalue` (Linden-Mathur), principal stratification — STROBE / TRIPOD reporting), and **Mode B — ML causal inference** (DML via `ddml` / `pdslasso`, S/T/X/R/DR meta-learners via `crforest` and `ddml interactive`, causal forest via `crforest` / `cforest`, BART/BCF via `bart` / `bartCause`-style externals, CATE distribution + policy tree via `crforest`, off-policy evaluation, conformal causal externals, fairness audit, DAG learning via `pcalg` / external Python callouts). Use when the user asks for a complete Stata empirical analysis, wants a reproducible .do-file pipeline, needs a Stata counterpart to the Python StatsPAI / Full-empirical-analysis-skill, or names a specific Stata step in isolation ("run reghdfe with two-way clustering", "csdid event study", "winsor2 at 1%", "esttab to LaTeX", "coefplot with CI", "ivreg2 weak-IV test", "synth_runner placebos", "teffects psmatch balance check"). Mode A triggers on "target trial emulation Stata", "teffects ipw aipw", "eltmle", "mrrobust", "mregger weighted median", "stcox AFT survival", "strmst2", "evalue Stata", "STROBE Stata", "公共健康 Stata", "流行病学 Stata". Mode B triggers on "ddml Stata", "pdslasso", "crforest causal forest Stata", "policy tree Stata", "因果机器学习 Stata".

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。

Production-grade Bayesian causal inference with PyMC, CausalPy, and DoWhy. Enforces DAG-first thinking, mandatory user checkpoints for assumptions, design-specific refutation, and defensible reporting with causal language guardrails. Trigger on: causal inference, causal effect estimation, treatment effects, counterfactuals, difference-in-differences (DiD), synthetic control, regression discontinuity (RDD), interrupted time series (ITS), instrumental variables (IV), propensity scores, DAGs, causal graphs, confounders, backdoor criterion, do-calculus, interventional distributions, pm.do(), pm.observe(), CausalPy, DoWhy, mediation analysis, refutation, sensitivity analysis, parallel trends, placebo tests, or any question of the form "does X cause Y" or "what is the effect of X on Y."

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。

Compares your key metrics against industry benchmarks for your specific vertical, campaign type, and platform. Tells you where you're ahead, where you're behind, and where there's room to improve — adjusted for your account size and spend level, because a $10K/month account and a $500K/month account have different benchmark realities. Platform: Google and Meta.

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。

When your CPA spikes, Claude breaks down exactly what caused it. It looks across your campaign data and isolates the contributing factors — audience fatigue, bid landscape shifts, creative decay, landing page conversion drops, budget distribution changes, or new competitor activity. Platform: Google and Meta.

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。

Parallel divergent ideation for coding agents. Spawns N isolated branches under different cognitive frames (regulator, biology, speedrunner, 10-year-old, $0 budget), scores, clusters, prunes traps, and deepens top survivors. Use on /adhd, "ADHD mode", brainstorm/ideate intents, or open-ended design, architecture, naming, API/SDK surface, and fuzzy-debugging decisions. Skip for syntax, lookups, bugs with known root cause, or closed phrasing ("quick", "standard", "canonical", "textbook"). Full pre-flight gate is in the skill body.

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。

Inspect and profile React Native component trees from agent-device. Use for React Native performance, profiling, props, state, hooks, render causes, slow components, excessive rerenders, or questions like why a component rerendered.

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。

File a GitHub issue only when explicitly requested or delegated by another selected workflow; do not create issues merely because a problem was found.

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。

Search Experience Optimization (SXO), the bridge between SEO and UX/CRO. Audits the journey from the SERP click to the on-page goal: click-through factors (title, meta, rich results), then post-click signals that keep users and drive conversions: above-the-fold relevance and intent match, page speed / Core Web Vitals, readability, clear CTAs, mobile usability, and what causes pogo-sticking back to Google. Use when the user has decent rankings but poor CTR or poor on-page conversion, wants better dwell time / engagement, less bounce, or a page experience aligned with search intent. Trigger on: "SXO", "search experience optimization", "good rankings but low CTR", "high bounce rate from search", "pogo-sticking", "improve dwell time", "SEO and conversion", "ranking but not converting", "engagement signals", "make this page convert search traffic". For pure landing-page conversion in ads use /google-ads-landing; for content quality use /seo-page.

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。

矛盾分析法：把复杂问题拆成若干对立面，找出规定其他矛盾的主要矛盾及其主要方面，判定对抗性 / 非对抗性，并据此选择处理方式。当问题头绪多、多个因素互相牵制、优先级不清、根因不明、反复修不好、trade-off 说不清时触发；直接执行类任务或用户已定方案时不触发。 English: Contradiction analysis. Decompose a tangled problem into opposing forces, isolate the principal contradiction and its dominant side, classify it as antagonistic or non-antagonistic, and choose the response accordingly. Trigger on unclear priorities, unknown root causes, recurring failures, or trade-offs that resist explanation; skip for direct execution or when the user has already chosen the solution.

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。

Create a high-signal bug issue or PR in the repo that owns the defect. Use this whenever the user asks to report, file, open, or triage a LazyCodex, lazycodex-ai, omo-codex, Codex plugin, or upstream Codex CLI bug, especially when they need source-backed root cause, reproduction steps, fix guidance, and GitHub routing.

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。

Investigate implementation failures using root-cause-first debugging. Use when an implementer is blocked, verification fails, or repeated remediation does not converge.

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。

Completion-evidence route used before claiming work is complete, fixed, passing, committed, or PR-ready. Requires fresh verification output before success claims. Do not use for root-cause debugging, TDD implementation, test-report packaging, or review-feedback triage.

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。