895 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Remove AI-generated code slop, unnecessary comments, and over-engineering from the current branch diff. Cleans up boilerplate, simplifies abstractions, strips defensive code, and in skill-file mode lints SKILL.md files for quality. Use when cleaning up code, simplifying, removing boilerplate, before committing, or when reviewing a skill before promoting 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。
Authors, validates, and troubleshoots AWS CloudFormation templates. Covers template authoring with secure defaults, local validation with either cfn-lint or cloudformation-validate, cfn-guard security and compliance checks as a recommended default, account-aware CloudFormation service pre-deployment validation, CloudFormation Express mode for faster deployments, and root-cause diagnosis of failed stacks using CloudFormation events and CloudTrail correlation. Also covers author-time template intelligence with the CloudFormation Language Server and published cloudformation-validate libraries.
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 changes before submitting a pull request. Run comprehensive checks including lint, tests, alignment review, and RFC analysis. Use before creating a PR, when asked if code is ready for review, or before pushing for 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。
TypeScript code shape inside a well-named module — taste, not lint. Prefer one class or namespace per file (the unit a test targets) over scattered free exports; consolidate related code, don't fragment. The unit of code should be the unit of spec. Use when authoring TS in `editor/grida-canvas*`, `editor/lib/`, or `packages/*`. Sibling to the `naming` skill; React-specific shape lives in `code-react`.
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。
Ships an app clone live on the user's own domain: a preflight gate (tests green, parity must-haves done, rebrand sweep clean, listing linted, legal pages up), production database and env vars, the host, DNS records for the domain and for email, Stripe live mode, OAuth redirects, monitoring, and mobile builds to TestFlight and Play. Use when the user says "deploy it", "ship it", "put it live", "connect my domain", "go to production", "publish the app", or after /replica-launch.
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。
Writes the launch for an app clone: the landing page built on the positioning angle, pricing set against the original's public pricing and its users' complaints, and the App Store and Google Play listing linted against the stores' limits and copycat rules. Use when the user says "landing page", "pricing", "how much should I charge", "App Store listing", "store screenshots", "launch plan", "Product Hunt", or after /replica-brand.
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 building or maintaining a personal LLM-powered knowledge base. Triggers: ingesting sources into a wiki, querying wiki knowledge, linting wiki quality, 'add to wiki', 'what do I know about', or any mention of 'LLM wiki' or 'Karpathy wiki'.
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。
Turn a raster logo (PNG/JPG/WebP/screenshot) into a clean minimal SVG with edge smoothness as the primary hard gate and IoU optimized as high as reasonably possible without a fixed global threshold, then into a choreographed logo animation delivered as standalone JS-rendered HTML, applying Disney's 12 animation principles. Use when asked to animate a logo, build a logo reveal / splash screen / brand intro, convert a logo image into animated SVG or HTML, add motion to a vectorized mark, or create loading/idle/hover motion for a brand mark. v2: also handles self-crossing draw-on choreography (split-fill, exact easing subdivision, tip glint), closed variable-width ribbon fitting, and quantitative motion QA (easing probe, ink-delta continuity sweep).
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。
Verification loop for Django projects: migrations, linting, tests with coverage, security scans, and deployment readiness checks before release or 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。
Find the mistakes agents keep repeating in this repo and make each one impossible. Try architecture first, then types, then a lint whose error names the fix, then a test, and write docs last. Prove each check fails on a real past mistake. Repeat this each time the operator corrects you. Use for /correct.
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 when you catch yourself writing the same instruction a second time, or notice a recurring correction. Encode the rule as a lint, metadata flag, runtime check, or script instead of more text.
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 the mistakes agents keep repeating in this repo and make each one impossible. Try architecture first, then types, then a lint whose error names the fix, then a test, and write docs last. Prove each check fails on a real past mistake. Repeat this each time the operator corrects you. Use for /correct.
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 when you catch yourself writing the same instruction a second time, or notice a recurring correction. Encode the rule as a lint, metadata flag, runtime check, or script instead of more text.
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。
Master ShellCheck static analysis configuration and usage for shell script quality. Use when setting up linting infrastructure, fixing code issues, or ensuring script portability.
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。
Set up or run design QA gates — token + hardcoded-value lint, automated a11y (axe), contrast, visual regression across variants/states/themes/RTL, and the manual a11y checklist. Use when the user wants CI quality gates, to prevent design regressions, or to QA a component/screen before shipping.
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。
Diagnose Swift Concurrency issues, refactor callback-based code to async/await, and guide Swift 6 migration when working with tasks, actors, @MainActor, Sendable, data races, thread safety, or concurrency-related compiler and linter warnings.
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 skills in this repo against agentskills.io spec and Claude Code best practices. Use via /validate-skills 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。
Turn an incoming set of findings — from an AI reviewer, a referee report, a code review, a linter, or a second model — into verified fixes, without letting a confident misread damage correct work. Every finding is a CANDIDATE until checked against the actual source. Use whenever you receive review comments, audit findings, or a critique you did not write yourself, especially when the reviewer is a model or when the volume is too large to check by feel.
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。
Architecture audit that maps module dependencies, checks layering integrity, and flags structural decay across a codebase, drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user asks to audit architecture, review folder/module structure, check for circular imports, understand how the codebase is organized, or asks "does this follow clean architecture?" or "why does everything depend on everything?". Also triggers for onboarding requests: "explain this codebase to a new developer" or "give me a codebase tour" (use onboarding mode). Do NOT trigger for: PR-level code review (use brooks-review) or line-level refactoring questions — this skill analyzes structural/module-level concerns, not individual functions.
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。
PR code review that surfaces decay risks, design smells, and maintainability issues with concrete Symptom → Source → Consequence → Remedy findings, drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user asks to review code, check a PR, shares a diff or pastes code asking "does this look right?" / "any issues here?" / "ready to merge?", or asks for feedback on a function, class, or file. Also triggers when user mentions: code smells / refactoring / clean architecture / DDD / SOLID principles / Hyrum's Law / deep modules / tactical programming / conceptual integrity / Brooks's Law / Mythical Man-Month / second system effect. Do NOT trigger for: questions about how to write code from scratch, language syntax questions, or framework/tool questions where no existing code is shared.
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。
Tech debt assessment that identifies, classifies, and prioritizes maintainability problems — helping teams build a refactoring roadmap — drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user asks about tech debt, refactoring priorities, what to clean up first, or asks "why is this so hard to change?", "what should we fix first?", or "how do I justify refactoring to management?". Do NOT trigger for: server health checks, HTTP /health endpoints, Kubernetes probes, database health, or application uptime — "health" in those contexts is infrastructure, not code quality. Also not for single-function refactoring questions.
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。
Test quality review drawing on twelve classic engineering books — with primary focus on xUnit Test Patterns, The Art of Unit Testing, How Google Tests Software, and Working Effectively with Legacy Code — that diagnoses structural problems in an existing test suite: brittleness, mock abuse, coverage illusions, slow execution, poor readability. Triggers when: user asks about test quality, shares test files for review, or expresses frustration: "tests keep breaking whenever I change anything", "our tests take forever", "tests pass but bugs still reach production", or "we have too many mocks". Do NOT trigger for: writing new tests from scratch (use the regular test-writing workflow) or testing framework/syntax questions — this skill reviews an existing suite for structural quality problems, not individual test 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。
Full-sweep mode: runs a unified analysis across all quality dimensions — code decay, architecture, tech debt, and test quality — then applies fixes directly to the codebase. Safe changes are auto-applied; risky changes are confirmed before execution. Drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user wants to "fix everything", "sweep the codebase", "auto-fix all issues", "clean up the whole project", or asks for a single command that both diagnoses and remediates quality problems. Do NOT trigger for: read-only audits or health reports where the user only wants findings without code changes; single-dimension reviews (use the focused skill instead: brooks-review / brooks-audit / brooks-debt / brooks-test); server health checks, HTTP /health endpoints, Kubernetes probes, database health, or application uptime.
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。
Combined codebase health dashboard that scores a project across all four quality dimensions — PR quality, architecture, tech debt, and test quality — in a single pass, drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user wants an overall quality assessment, asks "how healthy is this codebase?", "run all the checks", "I need a health score before the release", or wants to onboard a new team with a quality overview. Do NOT trigger for: server health checks, HTTP health endpoints, Kubernetes liveness/readiness probes, database health, or application uptime. Also do not trigger when the user specifically requests only one dimension — use the corresponding focused skill instead (brooks-review / brooks-audit / brooks-debt / brooks-test).
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。