「code quality」の検索結果

Deep code review with web research. Use when double-checking code against latest docs, verifying dependency versions, or reviewing security concerns. Complements automatic quality hook with ecosystem verification.

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。

Code review guidelines covering code quality, security, and best practices.

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。

Post-implementation review orchestrator. Launches 5 parallel background sub-agents: Oracle (goal/constraint verification), Oracle (code quality), Oracle (security), unspecified-high (hands-on QA execution), unspecified-high (context mining from GitHub/git/Slack/Notion). All must pass for review to pass. MUST USE after completing any significant implementation work. Triggers: 'review work', 'review my work', 'review changes', 'QA my work', 'verify implementation', 'check my work', 'validate changes', 'post-implementation 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。

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。

Use when adversarially reviewing a document that makes formal or technical claims — math derivations, physics papers, statistical analyses, benchmark reports, whitepapers. Inventories every equation and quantitative claim, verifies each AS NAMED in the text (never a paraphrase or a neighboring statement), and classifies VERIFIED / REFUTED / UNVERIFIABLE / VACUOUS. Triggers on "check this paper", "verify these claims", "is this derivation right", "review this proof", "audit this benchmark", "does the math hold up". For source-code review see code-review-and-quality; for skill/agent library audits see skill-library-review; for content quality scoring see content-ops.

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。

Improve or review ordinary dygo code changes for simplicity, focused scope, canonical ownership, clear boundaries, and verifiable behavior. Use for normal implementation and refactoring quality; use dygo-thermonuclear-review only for an explicitly severe audit.

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。

Perform comprehensive technical reviews of Ruby on Rails applications. Runs automated analysis tools (RubyCritic, Brakeman, bundler-audit, Gitleaks, Debride, linters, SimpleCov, Rails stats, Rails ERD), analyzes code for architecture, security, authorization (Pundit/CanCanCan), dead code, and design issues, and produces a structured markdown report with prioritized findings and a 0-10 score. Use when the user requests a tech review, code audit, project assessment, or quality analysis of a Rails application.

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。

Enforces KISS/DRY/YAGNI during authoring and ad-hoc quality reviews. Pragmatic standards: concise, direct, no unnecessary comments. NOT for post-hoc diff/PR review (see mk:review); NOT for behavior-preserving simplification passes (see mk:simplify).

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。

Convert between sequence file formats (FASTA, FASTQ, GenBank, EMBL, Stockholm) and re-encode FASTQ quality offsets using Biopython Bio.SeqIO. Use when changing a file format for a downstream tool, fixing FASTQ quality encoding (Phred+33 vs Phred+64 vs Solexa), or when a conversion risks silently dropping annotations or quality scores.

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。

ATAC-seq library quality control -- TSS enrichment, FRiP, fragment-size periodicity, library complexity (NRF/PBC1/PBC2), mitochondrial fraction, and ENCODE 4 thresholds. Use when assessing whether an ATAC-seq library passes ENCODE acceptance criteria, diagnosing transposition artefacts, comparing Omni-ATAC vs standard prep quality, or selecting which replicates to drop before peak calling.

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。

Review changed code for YAGNI, removable over-complexity, reuse, code quality, and efficiency, then apply worthwhile simplifications. Use when the user asks to simplify, clean up, tighten, de-hack recent changes, identify logic that can be dropped, or review whether added safeguards and edge-case handling are actually needed.

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。

Find overly complex code: files over 300 lines, functions over 50 lines, deeply nested conditions (4+ levels), and magic numbers. Use for code quality reviews, pre-release checks, or when asked to assess code maintainability.

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 the codebase for common security issues: hardcoded secrets, SQL injection vectors, XSS, unvalidated inputs, and insecure defaults. Use before deploying, as part of code quality review, or when asked to check for security issues.

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 a diff needs a readability review — naming, single-responsibility, DRY, dead code, mismatch with codebase conventions — dispatched by /review-changes, /do-and-judge, /judge.

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。

[Code Quality] Use when you need to run quality gate checklist.

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。

[Code Quality] Use when you need to simplify and refine code for clarity, consistency, and maintainability while preserving all functionality.

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。

[Code Quality] Use when the user asks to enhance documentation, add code comments, create API docs, improve technical documentation, document code, or update README files.

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 reviewing a pull request in the deepseek-harness repo — orients the reviewer to this codebase's standards (AGENTS.md conventions, defensive patterns, ADRs, quality gates) and the review-specific checks that code alone can't show

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 work produces a deliverable, factual claim, dataset, code change, decision, publication, deployment, automation, or irreversible action whose failure would matter; when the user asks for a quality gate, acceptance criteria, QA, completeness, validation, audit, evidence, preflight, release readiness, or a definition of done; or before claiming completion on medium- or high-risk work. Automatically decide whether a formal gate is warranted, derive task-specific pass/fail criteria, gather evidence, and block unsupported completion. Make sure to use this skill even when the user does not say "quality gate" if consequential work needs acceptance criteria or completion evidence. Skip formal gating for trivial, reversible, low-impact requests.

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。

Core technical, safety, and maintainability rules for codebase edits. Trigger when: - Writing code, refactoring, modifying files, or creating unit tests. - Proposing commits, reviewing git history, or auditing code quality. - Modifying files in any programming language (e.g. *.go, *.rs, *.py, *.ts, *.js, *.c, *.cpp). - Prompt contains keywords: refactor, build, compile, lint, test, git, commit, rule priority, type safety, error handling, defensive programming.

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 code review for commits and pull requests. Covers security, TDD, code quality, and documentation standards.

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 before completion, PR, deploy, handoff, or when verifying code changes. Runs advisory or blocking checks and reports 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。

Quality audit of a whole repo: bugs, security holes, what breaks under real load, risky code without tests, slow paths, and what to delete, merge or split. Ranked, each finding explained in plain English. One-shot report, changes nothing. Use for "audit this codebase", "review the whole repo", "find bloat", "what can I delete", /ponytail-audit.

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 quality focusing on deep modules, naming, model hygiene, and architectural clarity. Use after a burst of development, when codebase structure needs assessment, or to make code more agent-navigable.

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。