「findings」の検索結果

Review a pull request by fetching PR comments, running a comprehensive code review, evaluating findings, and dispatching to implementation. Use when the user asks to "review PR", "review pull request", "review this PR", "check PR before merging", or "full PR 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。

Survey the codebase for analogous features, reusable utilities, and existing patterns relevant to a proposed change, reading any source the task names outside this repo. Returns structured findings without writing code. Use when the user asks to "survey patterns", "find existing patterns", "look for analogous features", "check how similar things are done", "find prior art for this change", or needs pattern context before planning a change.

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Detect package managers and CI action pins, then discover outdated or vulnerable dependencies. Returns structured findings without upgrading. Use when the user asks to "review dependencies", "check for outdated packages", "check dependencies", "scan dependencies", "dependency review", "check for outdated GitHub Actions", or "are my workflow actions up to date".

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 for bugs, security vulnerabilities, API misuse, consistency issues, simplicity problems, or test coverage gaps and low-value tests by running internal reviews and a peer review in parallel and returning combined findings. Single-concern with a type argument, or full review with no argument. Use when the user asks to "review my code", "full code review", "review my changes", "check for bugs", "scan for bugs", "review correctness", "security audit", "find vulnerabilities", "review security", "check API usage", "verify against docs", "check for cross-file duplication", "review consistency", "check for code reuse", "review simplicity", "find untested code", "find redundant tests", or "review test coverage".

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。

Iteratively review and revise a plan until no new findings survive evaluation. Use when the user asks to "refine the plan", "iterate on the plan", "tighten the plan", or "improve the 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。

Explain whatever the user is pointing at right now in plain language: a pending question, a piece of code, an error, a command output, or an artifact like a plan or findings report. Use when the user asks to "explain this", "what am I being asked", "what's happening right now", "help me understand this", "what does this mean", "what does this error mean", "what is this code doing", or "what do these options mean".

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。

Assess project-wide structural technical debt: complexity hotspots, deprecated API usage, duplication clusters, architecture rot, and low-value tests. Ranks findings by impact and refactor effort into a report at .turbo/technical-debt.md. Use when the user asks to "assess technical debt", "find technical debt", "review technical debt", "what should we refactor", "find refactoring candidates", "where is the code rot", "what's our worst code", "find low-value tests", or "which tests can we delete". Analysis-only — does not modify 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。

Deep security review of a Convex app: authorization model, data access paths per table, HTTP action exposure, rate limiting, file storage access, scheduled function trust, and a written findings report. Use before launch, after an incident, or when the user asks for a full audit rather than a quick check.

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 and interpret security-research diffs between Windows versions or patch levels using this repo's WinDiff CLI and databases. Use when comparing Windows builds or binaries such as ntoskrnl.exe, ntdll.dll, win32k*.sys, ci.dll, or cng.sys to find changed syscalls, symbols, types, mitigation flags, callbacks, ETW/EtwTi telemetry, code-integrity behavior, drivers, or attack surface. Explain likely intent and security relevance with Windows-internals knowledge, and frame findings for anti-malware/EDR, anti-cheat, and vulnerability-research audiences rather than returning an uninterpreted symbol list.

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。

Design lens critique covering visual hierarchy, clarity, and anti-slop patterns — produces a findings table, no code edits unless asked. Use when the user wants a design review, says "what's wrong with this UI", or needs a second opinion before a handoff or presentation. Invoke when the user asks for critique on their UI, or mentions 'critique' alongside design / UI / frontend work.

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-ship gate — runs detector, verifies brief and tokens, applies the 10-pass finish bar, ranks findings by feedback hierarchy. Use when the user wants to ship, merge, or finalize a surface and needs a verdict (READY / NOT READY / BLOCKED) before committing. Invoke when the user asks for finalize on their UI, or mentions 'finalize' alongside design / UI / frontend work.

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。

Technical UI audit — a11y, performance, responsive. Produces a prioritized findings table. Invoke when the user asks for audit on their UI, or mentions 'audit' alongside design / UI / frontend work.

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 Core's pinned local React Doctor audit after React or Next.js edits; fix actionable correctness, accessibility, composition, performance, and design findings and validate exact exceptions across all eight targets. Use when the user mentions React Doctor or requests React diagnostics or cleanup.

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 question against high-trust primary sources and capture the findings as a Markdown file in the repo. Use when the user wants a topic researched, docs or API facts gathered, or reading legwork delegated to a background agent.

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。

Reviews your work across multiple categories like UI, typography, layout, color, writing and accessibility and gives you a detailed analysis of the findings.

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。

Compile NYC landmarks, DOB, ACRIS, HPD, and BSA findings into one property due-diligence report. Use for a full report; use individual NYC skills for one dataset.

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 an analysis is complete and verified, and you need to decide how to report it and archive the work for reproducibility

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 to run real static analysis over a diff or repo before shipping — Semgrep, CodeQL, secret scanning, dependency CVEs — and triage the findings into what must be fixed now versus noise. Trigger before a release or PR merge, during a security review, or when the user asks to scan the code for vulnerabilities.

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。

Cowork-style sweep of a folder of receipts, statements, and expense exports -- categorizes every transaction, matches receipts to statement lines, flags policy violations and anomalies, and outputs a clean expense report plus a findings memo.

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 deep code review of files, modules, a diff, or a branch - finding security vulnerabilities (mapped to OWASP Top 10:2025), correctness bugs, performance problems, and maintainability issues - and returns severity-ranked findings with evidence and concrete fixes. Use when the user asks to review, audit, or sanity-check code, asks "is this safe", "what's wrong with this", "find bugs", or wants a security or performance pass before shipping. For posting line comments on a GitHub pull request, use git-pr-reviewer.

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。

Uses Cowork-style multi-step analysis to process deal room documents -- contracts, financials, org charts. Outputs risk assessment, term comparison, key findings, and negotiation recommendations.

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。

Audits a codebase or business process for regulatory compliance across GDPR, HIPAA, SOC2, CCPA, and PCI-DSS. Scans for PII handling, data retention, encryption, access controls, audit logging, consent management, and data transfer issues. Generates a structured compliance report with findings, gap analysis, remediation steps, and evidence 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。

Export a research session into knowledge-intake compatible markdown. Use after a research session to hand findings to memory-palace.

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。

Merges, dedupes, ranks, and formats research findings into a report. Use after research agents return results from multiple channels to produce a ranked report.

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。