「bugs」の検索結果

POS (Point of Sale) architecture and patterns. Use when writing, editing, exploring, debugging, fixing bugs, implementing features, or reviewing WooPos-prefixed classes or files under ui/woopos/. POS uses a different architecture than the main app — plain ViewModel (not ScopedViewModel), pure Compose (no Fragments), Compose Navigation (no nav graphs), parent-child SharedFlow event bus. Loading this skill prevents applying main-app patterns that would be wrong for POS. For analytics use `pos-analytics`, for tests use `pos-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。

Four-phase debugging framework for any technical issue. Use when encountering bugs, errors, or unexpected behavior. Prevents random fix attempts.

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 open source contribution workflow: from scanning issues to submitting PRs. Use this skill whenever the user wants to contribute to an open source project, find issues to fix, submit a pull request, fork a repo to contribute, fix a GitHub issue, or mentions 'open source contribution'. Also trigger when they provide a GitHub repo URL and ask about contributing, say things like 'help me submit a PR', 'find good first issues', 'I want to contribute to X', or mention fixing bugs in someone else's project.

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。

全面代码库审计 — 自适应并行深度分析（前后端契约、数据完整性、异常处理/安全、架构/技术债、配置/缓存），结构化 findings + 对抗验证 + 基线对比，输出按严重程度排序的统一报告和修复路线图。支持 quick 快速体检模式。Use when user asks to audit, analyze, or review an entire codebase for design issues, find hidden bugs, check architecture health, or asks '全面审查', '代码库审计', '分析设计问题', 'audit codebase', 'health check', '有哪些问题', '快速体检'. Also trigger when user asks to find silent degradation, data flow breakpoints, type mismatches between frontend and backend, or wants to understand technical debt across a project.

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 ranking backlogs, deciding what to do first based on effort vs impact (quick wins vs big bets), prioritizing feature roadmaps, triaging bugs or technical debt, allocating resources across initiatives, identifying low-hanging fruit, evaluating strategic options with 2x2 matrix, or when user mentions prioritization, quick wins, effort-impact matrix, high-impact low-effort, big bets, or asks "what should we do first?".

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。

Capture structured feedback on the Han skills and agents used in the current session and optionally post it as a GitHub issue to testdouble/han. Use at the end of any session where one or more han-* skills or agents ran, to rate a run, log what worked and what didn't, or submit observations for maintainers. Does not review code, investigate bugs, or research options; use code-review, investigate, or research for those. Does not provide feedback on skills or agents from non-Han plugins.

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。

Walks a person through code changes one step at a time in conversation, starting at the entry point and following the flow that changes, showing a small chunk per step and explaining it in plain language. Defaults to the current branch's changes, and walks the code from the perspective of any context provided instead — a file, directory, symbol, pull request, plan, or ticket. Use when someone wants to be walked through, taught, paced through, or shown around code or a branch step by step, or to learn how a change works before reviewing or extending it. Stops after every step and waits, so the learner sets the pace. Paces through code that already exists and builds nothing — to build new work while being paced through it, use pairing. Does not produce a written overview to read alone — use code-overview. Does not review code quality — use code-review. Does not diagnose bugs — use investigate.

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 deep architectural analysis of a specified module, directory, or feature area by examining structural coupling, data flow, concurrency patterns, risk, and SOLID alignment. Use when the user wants to assess, evaluate, or review the architecture, design quality, dependency structure, coupling, cohesion, or technical debt of an existing part of the codebase. Not for investigating specific bugs, runtime errors, or failures — use investigate. Not for test planning — use automated-test-planning. Not for file-level code review — use code-review. Not for researching open-ended options, prior art, or how something works — use research. Not for designing a new interface or contract — use design-an-api. Not for planning the change its findings imply — use plan-a-change. Not for discovering bounded contexts, ubiquitous language, or where code boundaries diverge from domain boundaries — use ddd-analysis. Not for writing documentation or architectural decision records.

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 a gap analysis between two artifacts (a current state and a desired state) and produces a plain-language, stakeholder-readable report indexed by stable gap IDs. Use when the user wants to compare, evaluate, audit, or reconcile one artifact against another. Does not investigate runtime bugs — use investigate. Does not assess module-level architecture — use architectural-analysis. Does not research open-ended options with no second artifact to compare against — use research.

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。

Evidence-based investigation of issues, bugs, API calls, integrations, and other aspects of software development that need a deep dive to find the root cause and solutions. Use when you need to debug, troubleshoot, diagnose, or figure out why something is broken. Does not review code for quality or style — use code-review for auditing changes or post-code-review-to-pr for posting review feedback to GitHub. Does not assess architectural health or structural risk — use architectural-analysis for architectural concerns. Does not research open-ended options, prior art, or how something works when nothing is broken — use research for that. Does not plan the structural change a root cause calls for — use plan-a-change. Does not map bounded contexts or domain boundaries — use ddd-analysis. Does not capture feedback on Han's own skills — use han-feedback for that.

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 an existing codebase using strategic Domain-Driven Design to discover bounded contexts, surface ubiquitous language and semantic collisions, find places where code boundaries diverge from domain boundaries, and produce an evidence-backed domain and context map. Use when the goal is DDD-specific: bounded context discovery, ubiquitous language analysis, domain model discovery, or mapping contested ownership and responsibility. The entire repository is a valid scope; no module or directory must be named first. Does not assess architectural coupling, cohesion, or technical debt — use architectural-analysis. Does not design service communication, integration patterns, or deployment topology — use architectural-analysis or plan-a-feature. Does not refactor code, diagnose bugs, or review code quality — use refactor, investigate, or code-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。

Sharpens and stress-tests an existing plan file through multiple codebase-grounded review passes, editing it in place and recording every finding and iteration in cross-referenced companion files. Use this skill whenever the user wants to iterate on, refine, tighten, or improve a plan. Also use it when the user asks to verify, validate, or confirm feasibility of an approach. Does not implement plan steps, write test plans, review code, or investigate bugs, and does not generate new plans from scratch — use plan-a-feature for a new plan. Runs its review rounds to completion without pausing between them; to review each round as it lands, use pairing.

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。

Produces a human-readable, progressive-disclosure overview of unfamiliar code or a pull request's changes — why it exists (the real problem it solves or goal it serves for the business or a user), and from there what it does, how it flows, and where to start — so you can get up to speed before working on or reviewing it. Use when you want to understand, get oriented in, make sense of, explain, or get up to speed on a chunk of code, a file, a directory, a symbol, or a PR's changes. Writes the overview to a scratch file and changes no code. Does not review code quality or raise findings — use code-review for auditing changes or post-code-review-to-pr for posting them. Does not produce durable feature or system documentation — use project-documentation. Does not assess architecture or structural risk — use architectural-analysis. Does not diagnose bugs or root-cause failures — use investigate. Does not pace a person through the code one step at a time in conversation — use code-walkthrough.

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。

Fix "content disappears after publishing" bugs caused by REST API indexing lag. Use when: (1) User publishes content but it doesn't appear in their feed/profile, (2) REST API returns stale data immediately after write operations, (3) Async indexing backends (ClickHouse, Elasticsearch, etc.) haven't processed new events, (4) Content shows briefly then vanishes on refresh. Applies to any system with separate write path (WebSocket/direct DB) and read path (REST API with async indexing).

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 a GitHub issue and produce a structured implementation plan. Fetches issue details, explores the codebase, identifies affected layers (UI, BLoC, Repository, Client), and outputs a step-by-step plan with files to modify, testing strategy, and risk assessment. Works for bugs, features, and tasks. Invoke with /plan.

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。

Fix "count shows X but list shows empty" bugs when querying related events (comments, reactions, zaps, reposts) for Nostr addressable events (Kind 30000-39999). Use when: (1) REST API shows engagement count > 0 but WebSocket query returns empty, (2) Comments/reactions exist but app shows "No comments yet" or similar, (3) Working with NIP-22 comments, NIP-25 reactions, or NIP-18 reposts on Kind 34235/34236 video events or other addressable events. Root cause: clients may reference addressable events using either E tag (event ID) or A tag (kind:pubkey:d-tag format), and querying only one tag misses events tagged with the other.

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。

Fix "backend exists on a draft version but isn't reachable from the new Compute deploy" bugs after `fastly compute publish`. Use when: (1) You ran `fastly service backend create --autoclone` (or any dashboard/CLI change that creates a draft version) but did not activate that draft, (2) You then ran `fastly compute publish` which appeared successful but your backend / ACL / header / dictionary change is missing from the active version, (3) Compute code returns backend-not-found errors or misroutes requests, (4) You're surprised to see your draft version number "skipped over" in the version chain. Root cause: `fastly compute publish` clones from the currently-active version, not from the latest draft, so dashboard changes made in an un-activated draft get stranded.

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。

Automatically reduces bug-triggering test cases to minimal form while preserving the failure. Use when debugging with large, complex test cases that need simplification, reproducing bugs with minimal examples, or creating regression tests from verbose failure scenarios. Takes a failing test and systematically removes unnecessary inputs, steps, assertions, and code using delta debugging and other reduction algorithms. Supports unit tests, integration tests, input files, and multiple programming languages (Python, JavaScript, Java, C/C++).

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。

Automatically repair C/C++ code violations detected by TLA+ model checking. Takes a program, TLA+ specification, and TLC counterexample trace as input, then generates minimal code modifications to eliminate the violation. Use when: (1) TLC model checker reports an invariant violation, deadlock, or temporal property failure, (2) You have a counterexample trace and need to fix the corresponding code, (3) You need to understand how a TLA+ violation maps to program-level bugs, (4) You want to validate repairs by re-running TLC. Supports safety properties (invariants), liveness properties (temporal logic), and deadlock detection.

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。

Verify code correctness statically against specifications using type checking, contract verification, and formal methods. Use when: (1) Verifying type safety and null safety in Python, Java, or C/C++ code, (2) Checking design-by-contract specifications (preconditions, postconditions, invariants), (3) Validating code against formal specifications, (4) Ensuring code quality and correctness before runtime, (5) Finding potential bugs through static analysis. Supports Python (mypy, contracts), Java (javac, JML), and provides verification scripts and contract specification guidelines.

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 symbolic execution to detect potential errors by exploring execution paths, solving path constraints, and generating test inputs. Use when you need to analyze code for bugs like null dereferences, division by zero, buffer overflows, or assertion violations. Also use to generate test inputs that exercise different code paths, find edge cases, or explore all reachable program states. Supports Python, Java, and C/C++ through manual symbolic execution techniques and integration with tools like KLEE, angr, Z3, and Symbolic PathFinder.

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 semantic-level bugs by analyzing whether code behavior matches its intended purpose inferred from function/variable names, comments, docstrings, and documentation. Use when users need to: (1) Find logic errors where implementation contradicts stated intent, (2) Identify off-by-one errors and boundary mismatches, (3) Detect inverted logic or wrong operators, (4) Catch missing edge case handling, (5) Verify code matches its documentation. Highlights mismatches between intent and implementation across multiple programming languages.

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。

Unified GitHub triage for issues AND PRs. Classifies open items, answers questions from codebase, analyzes bugs, reviews PRs, and produces a structured triage report. Triggers: 'triage', 'triage issues', 'triage PRs', 'github 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。

Generate test cases using metamorphic testing by applying transformations based on metamorphic properties. Use when you need to expand test suites, test programs without oracles, validate mathematical or algorithmic properties, or detect subtle bugs through input-output relationships. The skill takes a program, original test cases, and metamorphic properties as input, generates new test cases by applying transformations, executes tests, verifies outputs satisfy properties, reports violations and anomalies, and outputs an expanded test suite with property coverage summary. Supports multiple programming languages and property types.

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。