5,711 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Dependency management, vulnerability scanning, license compliance, package updates, and monorepo tooling. Use when updating dependencies, auditing packages, managing licenses, or configuring package managers.
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 the full DSH sovereign lockdown: kill known phone-home daemons (Google, Zoom, CodeWhisperer), pin DNS to dnscrypt-proxy, enable firewall + stealth, install a pf anchor blocking telemetry endpoints, and permanently remove unauthorized LaunchAgents. Verifies with audit.sh + dome-check.sh and surfaces any remaining gaps.
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。
Visually QA a web application by launching it in Cursor's built-in browser, taking screenshots, checking console errors, and auditing network requests. Use after making UI changes to verify they look 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。
Review UI code for Web Interface Guidelines compliance. Use when asked to "review my UI", "check accessibility", "audit design", "review UX", or "check my site against best practices".
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 docs/prose for Writing Guidelines compliance. Use when asked to "review my docs", "check writing style", "audit prose", "review docs voice and tone", or "check this page against the writing handbook".
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。
Security code review for vulnerabilities. Use when asked to "security review", "find vulnerabilities", "check for security issues", "audit security", "OWASP review", or review code for injection, XSS, authentication, authorization, cryptography issues. Provides systematic review with confidence-based reporting.
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。
Analyze Sentry session replays to surface UX patterns, pain points, and user journeys for a given product area. Use when asked to "show me how users use", "day in the life", "UX research", "replay research", "how do customers use", "what's the user experience like for", "watch replays of", "analyze replays for", "user behavior on", or "replay UX audit" for any Sentry product surface.
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。
Scan agent skills for security issues. Use when asked to "scan a skill", "audit a skill", "review skill security", "check skill for injection", "validate SKILL.md", or assess whether an agent skill is safe to install. Checks for prompt injection, malicious scripts, excessive permissions, secret exposure, and supply chain risks.
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。
GitHub Actions security review for workflow exploitation vulnerabilities. Use when asked to "review GitHub Actions", "audit workflows", "check CI security", "GHA security", "workflow security review", or review .github/workflows/ for pwn requests, expression injection, credential theft, and supply chain attacks. Exploitation-focused with concrete PoC scenarios.
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。
Explore and diagnose a PostHog endpoint's execution logs — error messages, failed runs, cache misses, slow runs, or unexpected row counts during endpoint invocations. Use when the user says "my endpoint is failing", "show me the logs for endpoint X", "what error did endpoint Y produce", "why did endpoint Z return no rows", "is this endpoint hitting cache", or "check the last N runs". Focused on a single named endpoint's runtime log entries, not project-wide auditing or query performance profiling.
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 feature flags that were soft-deleted in the active project within a recent time window. Use when the user asks "what flags were deleted in the last N days", "show me recently deleted feature flags", "who deleted flag X", "audit recent flag deletions", or anything similar. Handles the non-obvious gotcha that system.feature_flags exposes the deleted boolean but does not expose a deletion timestamp — the actual deleted-at time lives in the per-flag activity log and must be cross-referenced.
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 why a PostHog endpoint is slow or expensive and propose a concrete fix — bump the cache TTL, enable materialisation, restructure variables, or rewrite the query. Use when the user says "this endpoint is slow", "my endpoint times out", "we're hitting the cost cap on this one", or asks "should I materialise this?". Focuses on a single named endpoint, not a project-wide audit.
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 bugs, security vulnerabilities, and code quality issues in local branch changes. Use when asked to review changes, find bugs, security review, or audit code on the current branch.
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。
Django performance code review. Use when asked to "review Django performance", "find N+1 queries", "optimize Django", "check queryset performance", "database performance", "Django ORM issues", or audit Django code for performance problems.
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。
Plan and execute reproducible computational research with explicit inputs, environments, provenance, deterministic steps, validation, and workspace outputs. Use for analyses that must be rerun, audited, or handed to another researcher.
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。
Rigorous methodology for evaluating ML models on established benchmarks. Covers proper train/val/test splits, baseline verification from original papers, exact metric formula discrepancies, data-leak detection checklist, multi-seed robustness, and honest reporting templates. Use when claiming to beat published baselines, writing methods papers, or auditing existing results.
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 portable, strongly-typed bioinformatics pipelines in the Common Workflow Language (CWL v1.2) as CommandLineTool/Workflow/ExpressionTool documents, validated with cwltool and run at scale on Toil/Arvados/Calrissian. Use when deciding CWL (portability/provenance/regulated) vs Nextflow/WDL/Snakemake; declaring secondaryFiles for indexed companions (.bai/.fai/.dict/.tbi and the caret rule); putting resources/containers under requirements (must-hold) vs hints (advisory) to avoid silent OOM; choosing scatterMethod (dotproduct vs flat_/nested_crossproduct); preferring $(...) parameter refs over ${...} JavaScript for portability; pinning DockerRequirement images; or emitting a CWLProv provenance object for audited/clinical settings.
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 every time you push a commit to an active pull request, to verify the PR is truly stable before reporting merge readiness. Covers the post-push wait window, AI review audit (Copilot/Greptile/Codex), and the gh commands to snapshot PR state. Trigger on "I pushed" or "is the PR ready to merge".
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 adversarially using parallel review layers (Blind Hunter, Edge Case Hunter, Acceptance Auditor) with structured triage into actionable categories. Use when the user says "run code review" or "review this 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。
Stellar smart contract development (Rust, soroban-sdk). Entry point with project setup, contract anatomy, and build/deploy workflow, routing to three companion files in this directory — development.md (storage/TTL, authorization, cross-contract calls, tokens, events, errors, upgrades, fees, troubleshooting), testing.md (unit, fuzz, property, fork, mutation, integration), and security.md (vulnerability classes, checklists, tooling, audits). Use when writing, testing, reviewing, securing, debugging, or shipping Stellar smart contracts, including anything the user calls "Soroban" — Soroban contracts, soroban-sdk, Soroban auth/storage/TTL errors, SEP-41 tokens, or SAC integration from contract 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。
Build an animation from scratch, making the decisions in the order that determines whether it feels right — should it animate at all, what purpose, which tool, which properties, which curve and duration, how it interrupts, how it exits. Writes the implementation. Use when asked to animate something, add motion, make a component feel alive, or build a transition. For critiquing existing motion use review-animations; for auditing a whole codebase use improve-animations.
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 UI code for Web Interface Guidelines compliance. Use when asked to "review my UI", "check accessibility", "audit design", "review UX", or "check my site against best practices".
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。
Implement privileged commands, admin UI, role checks, audit logs, and safe operational controls.
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 QA review pipeline — security audit (OWASP Top 10), performance analysis, accessibility check (WCAG 2.1 AA), and code quality 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。