4,480 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always
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 this skill any time a spreadsheet file is the primary input or output. This means any task where the user wants to: open, read, edit, or fix an existing .xlsx, .xlsm, .csv, or .tsv file (e.g., adding columns, computing formulas, formatting, charting, cleaning messy data); create a new spreadsheet from scratch or from other data sources; or convert between tabular file formats. Trigger especially when the user references a spreadsheet file by name or path — even casually (like "the xlsx in my downloads") — and wants something done to it or produced from it. Also trigger for cleaning or restructuring messy tabular data files (malformed rows, misplaced headers, junk data) into proper spreadsheets. The deliverable must be a spreadsheet file. Do NOT trigger when the primary deliverable is a Word document, HTML report, standalone Python script, database pipeline, or Google Sheets API integration, even if tabular data is involved.
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 implementing any feature or bugfix, before writing implementation 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。
One-command pre-execution review pipeline. Runs scope review → architecture review → security review → design review (auto-detects which apply) before executing any workflow. Surfaces only taste decisions for user approval. Auto-fixes obvious issues. Use before executing multi-step workflows, deploying, or when user says "review this plan", "check before running", "pre-flight", or "is this ready?". Runs CEO → eng → security automatically with encoded decision principles.
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。
Analyzes application logs: classifies errors, checks log quality/format, maps stack traces to source, recommends fixes.
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。
Checks DRY/KISS/YAGNI/architecture compliance with quantitative Code Quality Score. Validates decisions via MCP Ref. Reports with SEC-/PERF-/MNT-/ARCH-/BP-/OPT- prefixes.
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。
Applies safe auto-fixes for low-risk audit findings (unused imports, dead code, commented-out code). Confidence >=90% only. Creates single commit with summary.
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 after a verified Decisions harness audit when the user asks to apply safe fixes to harness drift, dead references, stale projected skills, duplicate routing, bloated state files, or invalid local config.
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 WCAG 2.1 AA compliant websites with semantic HTML, proper ARIA, focus management, and screen reader support. Includes color contrast (4.5:1 text), keyboard navigation, form labels, and live regions. Use when implementing accessible interfaces, fixing screen reader issues, keyboard navigation, or troubleshooting "focus outline missing", "aria-label required", "insufficient contrast".
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。
Scan HTML and JSX for accessibility issues and get fix suggestions. Use when you need to catch WCAG violations before they hit production.
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。
Babysit a GitHub pull request after creation by continuously polling review comments, CI checks/workflow runs, and mergeability state until the PR is merged/closed or user help is required. Diagnose failures, retry likely flaky failures up to 3 times, auto-fix/push branch-related issues when appropriate, and keep watching open PRs so fresh review feedback is surfaced promptly. Use when the user asks Codex to monitor a PR, watch CI, handle review comments, or keep an eye on failures and feedback on an open PR.
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。
End-to-end workflow for resolving one GitHub issue in dynamic-neural-field-composer - branch, TDD, build, review, docs, PR. Use when asked to fix, implement, or close a specific issue number.
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 encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes
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 implementing any feature or bugfix, before writing implementation 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。
Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always
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。
Vitest fast unit testing framework powered by Vite with Jest-compatible API. Use when writing tests, mocking, configuring coverage, or working with test filtering and fixtures.
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。
Breaks work into ordered, parallel-dispatchable tasks with an execution DAG. Output format is consumable by CI matrices and parallel agent runners — each task has a stable ID, declared file writes, conflict edges, and branch suffix. Use when you have a spec, brief, or shaper output and need to decompose it into implementable units. Use when a task feels too large, when scope spans multi-repo or multi-week work, or when parallel execution across multiple agents is on the table.
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。
Structures a vague engineering request into a well-scoped task brief before any implementation begins. Use when the user has an engineering goal but the ask is missing which repos are in scope, what "done" means, constraints, or open questions. Triggers on "shape this", "scope this out", "frame this work", "write a brief for", "I want to build" (with unclear scope), or the /shape slash command. Produces a filled task template (multi-repo feature, single-repo change, investigation, or bugfix). Not for already-scoped work — go straight to execution. If the domain is unclear, ask one qualifying question before routing — for marketing intake see marketing-shaper, game-design intake see game-design-shaper.
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 forensically auditing a Claude Code skill/agent/command/workflow library against RULESET.md by a fixed mechanical protocol — probing every file against the mechanically-checkable rules and reporting CONFORMS / VIOLATES / UNVERIFIABLE / N-A counts with quoted evidence. It casts NO judgment and emits NO pass/fail verdict; counts are the headline. Triggers on "investigate the library", "audit against RULESET", "find every violation", "forensic library audit", "evidence-only check". Not for routing/quality/single-responsibility judgment — use skill-library-review. Not the full sharded sweep — use the audit-library command.
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 committing or pushing changes and the repository needs a version bump. Analyzes commits using conventional commit prefixes to determine whether the next release is a major, minor, or patch increment. Also use when the user asks about versioning, release planning, or changelog generation.
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 implementing features, fixing bugs, or refactoring code that may invalidate existing docs. Detects stale documentation by matching the code diff against in-repo doc files and applies targeted updates. Relevant when code changes rename, remove, or add APIs, fields, config keys, or CLI flags. Also applies when the user says "update docs", "check docs", or "are the docs stale", or when reviewing a branch for documentation accuracy.
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。
Apply these opinionated Python 3.11+ conventions when writing Python in this codebase: type hints with mypy, async/await, pytest fixtures, dataclasses, Poetry packaging, production patterns.
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 and maintain the learnings in `docs/solutions/` against the current codebase — fix drifted paths and links, merge overlapping docs, replace guidance the code no longer supports, delete obsolete docs, reconcile the `CONCEPTS.md` glossary, then report and commit. Also bootstraps `CONCEPTS.md` on request and, when asked, culls docs whose reasoning the code already explains. Use for "refresh the learnings", "audit docs/solutions", "are our solution docs still accurate", "clean up / prune the learnings", "create a CONCEPTS.md", or after a refactor, rename, migration, or dependency upgrade that likely invalidated documented solutions. Not for capturing a new learning — use `learn-with-docs`.
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。
Optimize for search engine visibility and ranking. Use when asked to "improve SEO", "optimize for search", "fix meta tags", "add structured data", "sitemap optimization", or "search engine optimization".
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。