「code quality」の検索結果

Simplifies and refines code for clarity, consistency, and maintainability while preserving all functionality. Focuses on recently modified code unless instructed otherwise. This skill should be used when code-quality checks pass but the code would benefit from structural cleanup — deduplication, branching simplification, naming improvements, or dead-code removal. Invoked as a subagent from /code-quality or directly via the Task tool.

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。

Evaluate ENCODE experiment quality using standard metrics and audit flags. Use when the user asks about data quality, wants to filter for high-quality experiments, needs to interpret quality metrics (FRiP, NSC, RSC, NRF, IDR, TSS enrichment, fragment size), wants to understand ENCODE audit warnings, needs to compare quality across experiments, or is deciding whether data is usable for their analysis. Also use when the user mentions QC, quality control, or data filtering.

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 code diffs and files to identify bugs, security vulnerabilities (SQL injection, XSS, insecure deserialization), code smells, N+1 queries, naming issues, and architectural concerns, then produces a structured review report with prioritized, actionable feedback. Use when reviewing pull requests, conducting code quality audits, identifying refactoring opportunities, or checking for security issues. Invoke for PR reviews, code quality checks, refactoring suggestions, review code, code quality. Complements specialized skills (security-reviewer, test-master) by providing broad-scope review across correctness, performance, maintainability, and test coverage in a single pass.

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 working with Codescene — codeScene behavioral code analysis including code health scoring, hotspot detection, change coupling analysis, and PR integration for code quality gates. Use when configuring CodeScene for codebase visualization, technical debt prioritization, and automated code review feedback.

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 AI-powered code review on Git changes using the `ocr` CLI from alibaba/open-code-review. Use when the user asks to review code, review a pull request, review staged/unstaged changes, review a commit, or compare branches for code quality issues. Produces line-level review comments and can automatically apply fixes when requested. With appropriate review rules, can detect various types of issues including bugs, security vulnerabilities, performance problems, and code quality concerns.

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。

Evaluates code generation models across HumanEval, MBPP, MultiPL-E, and 15+ benchmarks with pass@k metrics. Use when benchmarking code models, comparing coding abilities, testing multi-language support, or measuring code generation quality. Industry standard from BigCode Project used by HuggingFace leaderboards.

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 a git diff or explicit file scope for reuse, code quality, efficiency, clarity, and standards issues, then optionally apply safe Codex-driven fixes. Use when the user asks to "simplify code", "review changed code", "check for code reuse", "review code quality", "review efficiency", "simplify changes", "clean up code", "refactor changes", or "run 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。

Evaluates code generation models across HumanEval, MBPP, MultiPL-E, and 15+ benchmarks with pass@k metrics. Use when benchmarking code models, comparing coding abilities, testing multi-language support, or measuring code generation quality. Industry standard from BigCode Project used by HuggingFace leaderboards.

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 named refactoring transformations to improve code structure without changing behavior. Use when the user mentions "refactor this", "code smells", "extract method", "replace conditional", "technical debt", "move method", "inline variable", "decompose conditional", or "clean up this messy code". Also trigger when cleaning up legacy code, preparing code for new features by restructuring, or identifying which transformation fits a specific code smell. Covers smell-driven refactoring, safe transformation sequences, and testing guards. For code-quality foundations, see clean-code. For managing complexity, see software-design-philosophy.

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。

Evaluates code generation models across HumanEval, MBPP, MultiPL-E, and 15+ benchmarks with pass@k metrics. Use when benchmarking code models, comparing coding abilities, testing multi-language support, or measuring code generation quality. Industry standard from BigCode Project used by HuggingFace leaderboards.

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。

Clean-code engineering standards for writing, refactoring, and reviewing code in any programming language. Use this whenever the user asks to write clean code, follow clean-code principles, refactor for clarity, improve naming, reduce complexity or duplication, separate concerns, tighten error handling, work test-first or do TDD, or otherwise raise code quality, readability, and maintainability. Also use when writing or reviewing Operately APIs or Ecto queries. Apply these rules by default when producing or changing code for a quality-conscious user.

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。

Apply test quality principles when generating or reviewing test code. Enforces Arrange-Act-Assert structure, one behavior per test, assertion quality, test isolation, meaningful naming, and test data management. Use when writing tests, reviewing test code, or when the user mentions 'write tests', 'test this', 'test quality', 'test review', 'improve tests', or 'test structure'. Loaded automatically by the code-generating molecules (code-forge, refactor-safely, bug-fix). This skill governs the craft of writing individual test cases -- not what to test (that is driven by the code being implemented) but how to write tests that are reliable, readable, and maintainable.

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。

Writing maintainable code - readability principles, SOLID patterns applied pragmatically, and the judgment to know when rules should bendUse when "code quality, clean code, readability, naming, SOLID, refactor, code review, best practices, maintainable, how should I structure, clean-code, solid, readability, maintainability, code-review, naming, functions, principles" mentioned.

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。

Delegates coding tasks to Codex CLI for prototyping, debugging, and code review. Use when: (1) Backend/logic implementation, (2) Algorithm design and optimization, (3) Bug analysis and debugging, (4) API/database code generation, (5) Code quality review and refactoring. Triggers: "implement algorithm", "debug", "analyze code", "backend task", "API implementation", "optimize performance", "refactor", "generate prototype", "code review". IMPORTANT: Default sandbox="read-only" (analysis/review/patch generation); use sandbox="workspace-write" only when codex must run tests/builds to verify. Always request unified diff patches only. Supports multi-turn sessions via SESSION_ID.

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。

Pre-commit code quality review for Unity C# code. Checks against Rules, CODING_STANDARDS.md, NAMING_CONVENTIONS.md, and GDD Gherkin test coverage. Use when code has been written and tests are passing but before committing. Runs automatically at Step 8.5 of /uw-cmd-implement-feature. Triggers on "review this code", "check my implementation", "pre-commit review", "code review", "check before commit", "is this ready to commit", "review my changes", or any request to validate 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。

two-stage review (spec compliance first, then code quality), refactoring, and quality improvement. Use when reviewing code, eliminating code smells, reducing technical debt, refactoring methods, running self-critique loops, or improving maintainability and readability.

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 a git diff or explicit file scope for reuse, code quality, efficiency, clarity, and standards issues, then optionally apply safe Codex-driven fixes. Use when the user asks to "simplify code", "review changed code", "check for code reuse", "review code quality", "review efficiency", "simplify changes", "clean up code", "refactor changes", or "run 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。

Evaluates code generation models across HumanEval, MBPP, MultiPL-E, and 15+ benchmarks with pass@k metrics. Use when benchmarking code models, comparing coding abilities, testing multi-language support, or measuring code generation quality. Industry standard from BigCode Project used by HuggingFace leaderboards.

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。

Claude Codeで開発作業を繰り返し進める自律ループの設計を案内します。順次実行から並列作業まで、履歴の引き継ぎや品質確認、停止条件を整理します。

• 順次実行の開発手順を設計したいとき
• 反復実行で進捗を引き継ぎたいとき
• 並列作業と変更の統合を調整したいとき

Thorough, file-cited technical debt audit across 9 dimensions using AST-grep (tree-sitter), grep, LSP, and language-native tooling. Produces TECH_DEBT_AUDIT.md with severity, effort estimates, and prioritized fixes. Use when asked for codebase health check, tech debt audit, architecture review, code quality assessment, or cleanup planning. Triggers: 'tech debt', 'technical debt', 'debt audit', 'code health', 'technical debt audit', 'codebase health check', 'find tech debt', 'debt analysis', 'audit code quality'.

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。

Read-only R code review protocol for `.R` scripts. Checks code quality, reproducibility, domain correctness, tidyverse idioms, and professional standards; produces a report without editing. Use when user says "review this R script", "check the R code", "audit the analysis code", "code review on the R", or when an R file is touched as part of a paper submission. NOT for running the code — pair with `/audit-reproducibility` for numeric 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。

Review generated or changed WordPress code — plugins, themes, and blocks — before it ships. Best used reactively after an agent writes, edits, or reviews code touching WordPress APIs: add_action/add_filter, shortcodes, meta boxes, AJAX handlers, REST routes, WP_Query or $wpdb, widgets, or WP-CLI commands. Use on 'review this plugin', 'is this safe to ship', 'make this translatable', 'speed up this query', or after tasks like 'write a plugin' or 'add an endpoint/shortcode/meta box'. Enforces escaping and sanitization, nonces plus capability checks, prepared database queries, core-API-first development, translation-ready strings, and query/caching discipline. DO NOT USE for WooCommerce-specific order, product, or checkout logic (use woo-guard), non-WordPress PHP, generic code quality review (use clean-code-guard), test code review (use test-guard), server or hosting configuration, or conceptual WordPress 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。

Review MATLAB code for quality, performance, maintainability, and adherence to MathWorks coding standards. Uses check_matlab_code and matlab_coding_guidelines. Use when reviewing code, checking style, finding code smells, assessing quality, or preparing code for handoff or publication.

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。