「validation」の検索結果

Spring Boot 4 REST API implementation patterns. Use when creating REST controllers, REST endpoints, request validation, exception handlers with ProblemDetail (RFC 9457), API versioning, content negotiation, WebFlux reactive endpoints, HTTP clients with @HttpExchange, JSON serialization with Jackson 3, error handling, or CORS configuration. Covers @RestController patterns, Bean Validation 3.1, global error handling, and declarative HTTP clients.

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。

Detect project linting and validation tools, build an execution pipeline, run all tools to zero errors, and fix issues using an atomic fix protocol. Auto-detects Makefile targets, package.json scripts, Go tools, Python tools, and other common linters. Use when fixing linting errors, running validation pipelines, or ensuring code quality before committing.

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。

Use when authoring, reviewing, or maintaining Salesforce DevOps operational documents — runbooks, environment matrices, deployment guides, and post-deploy validation checklists. Triggers: 'runbook', 'environment matrix', 'deployment guide', 'pre-deploy checklist', 'post-deploy validation', 'how do I document a deployment', 'rollback procedure template'. NOT for what actually belongs on the pre-deploy gate — use devops/pre-deployment-checklist. NOT for release calendar, versioning, or go/no-go governance — use devops/release-management. Also covers: the devops-process YAML artefact (environment ladder, change-request state machine, deploy contract, deploy order, RACI), the deployOptions the runbook must record (checkOnly, testLevel, rollbackOnError, ignoreWarnings, purgeOnDelete, singlePackage, runTests), destructiveChangesPre/Post ordering, and the change-request emergency path.

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。

Performs comprehensive preflight validation of Bicep deployments to Azure, including template syntax validation, what-if analysis, and permission checks. Use this skill before any deployment to Azure to preview changes, identify potential issues, and ensure the deployment will succeed. Activate when users mention deploying to Azure, validating Bicep files, checking deployment permissions, previewing infrastructure changes, running what-if, or preparing for azd provision.

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。

Defensive CI/CD patterns: semver validation, token checks, retry logic, draft detection — earned from v0.8.22

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。

Build signal-based forms in Angular v21+ using the new Signal Forms API. Use for form creation with automatic two-way binding, schema-based validation, field state management, and dynamic forms. Triggers on form implementation, adding validation, creating multi-step forms, or building forms with conditional fields. Signal Forms are experimental but recommended for new Angular projects. Don't use for template-driven forms without signals or third-party form libraries like Formly or ngx-formly.

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。

Drafts a U.S. C-TPAT Security Profile for CBP submission covering physical, personnel, procedural, conveyance, and IT security domains. Use when preparing C-TPAT enrollment, certification, validation, or recertification profiles, or assembling a CBP-ready security narrative. Trigger: C-TPAT, CBP security profile, supply chain security, trusted trader, customs 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。

Use when writing tests, running validation scripts, or (in TDD mode) enforcing red-green-refactor cycle. Activates during Phase 2 (Test) and Phase 3 (Build). NOT for coverage gap mapping (see mk:nyquist); NOT for sprint contract negotiation (see mk:sprint-contract).

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。

YC Office Hours — product validation for a new product, feature, or side-project concept. Startup mode tests demand; Builder mode develops an unvalidated product idea. Use when the user asks whether something is worth building or has an idea whose problem/value is not yet validated. Proactively suggest when the user describes a new product idea or is exploring whether something is worth building — before any code is written. Use BEFORE a plan exists. For reviewing an existing plan, use /mk:plan-ceo-review.

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。

Design resilient React error handling with Error Boundaries, Sentry integration, recovery UI, retry patterns, and graceful degradation. Activate on: error boundary, crash recovery, Sentry, error fallback UI, retry logic, unhandled exceptions. NOT for: form validation errors (use form-validation-architect), API error codes (use api-architect).

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。

Great Expectations, dbt tests, anomaly detection, and data contracts for data quality. Activate on: data quality, data validation, Great Expectations, data contract, anomaly detection, SLA, freshness check, schema validation. NOT for: dbt model structure (use dbt-analytics-engineer), schema evolution (use schema-evolution-manager).

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。

Architect data fetching with TanStack Query v5, SWR, optimistic updates, prefetching, and cache invalidation strategies. Activate on: React Query, SWR, optimistic updates, cache invalidation, prefetching, stale-while-revalidate, infinite queries. NOT for: REST API design (use api-architect), database queries (use database skills), GraphQL schema (use graphql-expert).

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。

Validate protein designs using AlphaFold2 structure prediction. Use this skill when: (1) Validating designed sequences fold correctly, (2) Predicting binder-target complex structures, (3) Calculating confidence metrics (pLDDT, pTM, ipTM), (4) Self-consistency validation of designs, (5) Multi-chain complex prediction with AlphaFold-Multimer. For faster single-chain prediction, use esm. For QC thresholds, use protein-qc.

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。

REST/GraphQL API testing with automated validation — test endpoints, validate responses, check status codes, and ensure API contracts

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 writing validation — Form Requests, rules, custom rule objects, request-boundary design — even when the user just says 'validate this input' or 'check the request' without naming it.

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。

Design, implement, and integrate generalized validation harnesses across a producer-consumer boundary after a local harness contract exists. Use when refactoring custom validation CLIs/MCPs for large polyrepos, extending Steward across sibling repos, or deploying a local tool to a consumer project for dogfooding and testing; use mcp-harness-repo-maintainer first for initial steward.yaml adoption and cold-start proof.

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。

Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS) development patterns. Drug interaction checking, dose validation, clinical scoring (NEWS2, qSOFA), alert severity classification, and integration into EMR workflows. Use when building clinical decision support — drug interaction checks, dose validation, clinical scoring, or alert severity.

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 when to use and when not to use return validators in Convex functions. Use this skill whenever the user is writing Convex queries, mutations, or actions and needs guidance on return value validation. Also trigger when the user asks about Convex type safety, runtime validation, AI-generated Convex code, Convex AI rules, Convex security best practices, or when they're debugging return type issues in Convex functions. Trigger this skill when users mention "validators", "returns", "return type", or "exact types" in the context of Convex development. Also trigger when writing or reviewing Convex AI rules or prompts that instruct LLMs how to write Convex code.

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 when to use and when not to use return validators in Convex functions. Use this skill whenever the user is writing Convex queries, mutations, or actions and needs guidance on return value validation. Also trigger when the user asks about Convex type safety, runtime validation, AI-generated Convex code, Convex AI rules, Convex security best practices, or when they're debugging return type issues in Convex functions. Trigger this skill when users mention "validators", "returns", "return type", or "exact types" in the context of Convex development. Also trigger when writing or reviewing Convex AI rules or prompts that instruct LLMs how to write Convex code.

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。

設計文書、分析レポート、報告書などを批判的な視点で徹底レビューするスキル。 6つの異なる立場（開発者、PM、顧客、QA、セキュリティ、運用）のペルソナを持つサブエージェントが並列でレビューを実行し、 「本当にそうか？」「根拠は何か？」「テストできるか？」「運用できるか？」という視点で 曖昧さ、根拠不足、論理飛躍、テスト不能、セキュリティリスク、運用懸念を検出する。 Use when reviewing design documents, analysis reports, incident reports, or any document requiring rigorous validation of claims and evidence.

METAINFORMANT rules for directory src/metainformant/gwas/validation. Use when editing, adding tests, or reviewing code under this path. Read the linked AGENTS.md first; use uv only, write outputs to output/, real implementations.

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 FAA AMS Lifecycle V&V Guidelines (verification and validation), Version 3.0, dated April 2017. Use for applying verification and validation across the FAA Acquisition Management System (AMS) lifecycle: the verify-vs-validate distinction (built right vs. right thing), the work-product/component/product tiers, the nine V&V planning elements, the four method catalogs (Appendix C), decision-point-gated V&V (SASP, CRD, Investment Analysis, Solution Implementation, In-Service Management), the Appendix B document checklists (PRD/APB/ISPD/PMP), and the DT/OT/IOA test triad. Scope limits: this is an FAA acquisition-V&V doctrine, NOT a general SE process model, requirements-engineering manual, or test-design textbook. It borrows its core V&V definitions from CMMI v1.2 (SEI, paraphrased) and presumes the surrounding AMS lifecycle (see the FAA SEM pack); its phase tables are policy snapshots as of April 2017 and it is thin on detailed test methods, tool specifics, and anything outside FAA acquisition governance.

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。

Runs twice in a PFD to P&ID job. Part 1, before gate G3, validates the discipline proposals for provenance, UNKNOWN handling, conflicts, prohibited content and cross-section consistency and returns results and blocking items. Part 2, before gate G5, assembles the review package, with job header, gate record, every register and proposal, consolidated UNKNOWN list, feedback log and closing statement. Use when the user asks to "validate the enrichment", "run validation before G3", "assemble the review package" or "build the G5 package". Do not use for the readiness map, use pid-tool-readiness-mapping instead; do not use to produce a missing discipline section, use the discipline skill that owns it. 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。

Proposes tag and number structures for the new lines and instruments in a P&ID draft according to the project's numbering procedures, checks every tag extracted from the PFD against the quoted procedure format, and lists cross-section identifier mismatches and the registry checks a human must run. Never invents a numbering convention, never alters a PFD tag and never assigns a sequence number the procedure reserves for the registry. Use when the user asks to "run the tagging and numbering section", "check the tags against the numbering procedure", "propose the tag structure for the new lines and instruments" or "list the registry checks before validation" after the process safety flags. Do not use for validating the four sections, use validation-and-review-package instead; do not use for instrument content, use instrumentation-and-control-enrichment. 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。