「acceptance」の検索結果

Assess requirement clarity, testability, completeness, consistency, and traceability without inventing missing acceptance criteria.

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。

Adversarially verify an implementation against its objective, acceptance criteria, definition of done, and prohibitions using fresh evidence. Use for completion gates, release readiness, or independent verification after implementation and 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。

Autonomous Reforge-guided refactor workflow for the Humans repository. Use when the user wants Codex to target a section such as Shifts, Users, Teams, Tickets, Camps, or Store, create a dedicated worktree/branch from origin/main, run iterative architecture-focused improvements, score each stage with Reforge, gate commits through a score-blind read-only architecture review, append score and verdict details to commit messages after review acceptance, push progress, and open a PR when the loop reaches stasis.

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 code changes against linked GitHub issue specs to catch implementation drift — building something plausible but wrong. Checks each acceptance criterion against actual 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。

任務卡的必要調整。Use when ATM task cards contain proposal-style notes or dated additive acceptance sections such as 識別/行為/狀態機提案、不重啟驗收、ATM 演進規劃書 v2、連鎖影響、治理補丁, and those notes must be re-analyzed into the formal task-card sections.

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。

BROWSER VFX ACCEPTANCE SKILL — Use built-in browser/headless browser to automatically verify Cocos VFX block effects and composed VFX recipes in BattleScene preview (`http://localhost:7456`, `previewMode=true`, `previewTarget=5`). USE FOR: VFX health audit, per-block smoke validation, combo recipe regression checks before merging `vfx-block-registry.ts` / `vfx-effects.json`. DO NOT USE FOR: Cocos Editor window screenshot capture, compile-error debugging, or pure log-only diagnosis without browser preview.

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。

Run a structured discovery interview and produce a complete, developer-ready Product Requirements Document. Load when the user asks to write a PRD, create product requirements, document a feature, define user stories with acceptance criteria, or turn a rough idea into a formal product requirements document. Also triggers on "document this feature", "write requirements for", "create a one-pager", "turn this into a PRD", "I need a PRD for", or any request to produce a structured product document for stakeholder alignment or engineering handoff. Supports Full PRD, Lean PRD, and One-Pager formats. Note: for executable feature specifications (FRs, NFRs, ACs as Given/When/Then consumable by AI coding agents), route to `feature-spec` instead — PRDs frame the product, feature-specs encode the implementable contract.

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。

Write the executable feature specification — the WHAT and WHY artifact that agents and reviewers treat as source of truth. Owns both /specify and /clarify modes. Load when the user asks to write a feature spec, write a specification, write an executable spec, define functional requirements, capture acceptance criteria as Given/When/Then, or when the spec-driven-development orchestrator routes here. Also triggers on "feature spec", "executable spec", "/specify", "/clarify", "write the spec for this feature", "specification for", "spec-driven", "machine-readable spec". Output: docs/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<slug>-feature-spec.md. Hard gate: cannot Approve while [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain.

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。

Use this skill to understand when electronic records are acceptable to FMCSA inspectors. Covers PDF, original-format, and search-ability requirements.

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。

受け入れ基準書を作成する。検収基準、完了条件の定義時に使う。

将抽象的Acceptance Criteria（Given-When-Then）转换为具体的数值示例和真实对话，让AC对PM/客户/测试人员更易懂。适合在AC编写完成后、准备测试或向客户展示时使用，当AC格式正确但过于抽象时。帮助不熟悉BDD的PM/BA/测试人员理解测试场景，让AC从抽象规则变成可直接用于手动测试的具体步骤。

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 vague Acceptance Criteria into measurable checks and test assertions

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。

Используйте, когда нужно прогнать BDD или acceptance contour через канонический test entrypoint проекта.

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 for non-trivial feature, behavior, workflow, or architecture work before execution planning. Create or update a versioned spec under planning/specs/active with design intent, alternatives, risks, acceptance criteria, and planning readiness.

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 for non-trivial, design-bearing, or architecture-affecting work before execution planning. Creates or updates a versioned spec under planning/specs/active/ with design intent, alternatives, risks, and acceptance criteria.

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 or materially revise a repository-local test plan, QA plan, acceptance matrix, or regression checklist on explicit request or when one concrete testability gap blocks formal DEFINE; do not trigger for ordinary implementation, test execution, TDD, review, or completion claims.

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 Spark change needs its authoritative owner, affected boundaries, risks, acceptance criteria, and smallest verifiable slice established before implementation or 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。

Cross-cutting methodology for the CVE-hunting pipeline (ported from find-cve-agent): when a bug is design-vs-real, false-positive avoidance, version checking before reporting, responsible disclosure norms, acceptance-rate expectations per vuln class, vulnerability chaining playbook, known false-positive patterns, maintainer-response patterns, secure-pattern reference (what NOT to flag), and a self-criticism checklist to run before claiming a finding. Use this alongside the cve-hunter/cve-exploiter/cve-validator agents and the /cve-hunt pipeline — load it whenever judging if a finding is real, worth reporting, or already fixed.

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。

Records and evaluates event-specific probability forecasts for agent outputs. NOT for validation or automatic acceptance.

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。

Synthesizes evidence-linked feedback from validation results, confidence evidence, and iteration triggers. Proposes bounded revision guidance for a stated acceptance failure. Activate on 'synthesize feedback', 'improvement suggestions', 'actionable feedback', 'iteration guidance', 'feedback generation'. NOT for iteration detection (use dag-iteration-detector) or convergence tracking (use dag-convergence-monitor).

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。

Discipline an AI agent needs to work an issue/task tracker (Jira, Linear, GitHub Issues) as the shared source of truth: pull the right next item instead of inventing work, search before creating to avoid duplicates, write actionable items with checkable acceptance criteria, keep status transitions honest, and link work to items via branches/PRs/commits so progress is legible. Use when an agent picks up tracker work, files a new issue, updates status, or closes an item. NOT for authoring the PR itself (use agent-pr-authoring), roadmap-level planning and prioritization (use legible-roadmap-with-sidequests), or the mechanics of multiple agents coordinating on the same codebase (use multi-agent-coordination).

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。