「findings」の検索結果

Suede Labs agent-team orchestrator: split complex work into coordinated lanes with explicit file ownership, WIP collision detection, quality gates, escalation thresholds, rollback plans, and handoffs that prove what shipped. Use when one shared change needs safe parallel ownership across builders and reviewers, when a lane map must be resolved before anyone opens a file, or when running a repeatable public-repository contribution program with issue scoring, atomic task leases, isolated worktrees, and explicit publication authority. NOT FOR: one repo change a bundled DAG can run end to end (use suede-graph-flo-xr); findings-only review of a diff (use suede-code-review) or an A-F ship grade (use suede-code-grader); CI, branch protection, or merge-gate wiring (use suede-ci-gate); branch and worktree setup on a stale mirror (a private Suede Labs companion, not in this pack).

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。

Suede Slop Stop: Suede Labs context-aware anti-slop pass for finished prose. Find or remove generic filler, manufactured emphasis, false agency, formulaic structure, chat and draft residue, and formatting applied by rule, without flattening the author's voice. Use before copy, a README, an email, a social post, or a doc ships; after a long assisted-writing session; or for a findings-only slop audit. NOT FOR: writing new copy (use suede-copy); deciding whether a person or model wrote text; changing or certifying facts, which require primary evidence.

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。

Suede Thought Graph shipping search for a multi-file repo change. Use when competing implementation plans need one evidence-gated selection before any build. Halts on hazards, collisions, budget exhaustion, or no safe winner. Reads production; never deploys. NOT FOR: bulk independent work (use a separate private worker-fleet pass); findings-only diff review (use suede-code-review); CI or branch-protection wiring (use suede-ci-gate); copy-only shipping (use suede-ship-copy).

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。

Produce an intensive, cited analytical report: executive summary, multi-angle findings, contrarian views, open questions, and full sources. Use only when the user needs rigorous synthesis of a complex topic (scientific, technical, policy, or market-analytical) that cannot be answered with a short search, and wants a formal written report, not a recommendation list. Do not use for product picks, top-N lists, quick lookups, or routine "find out about X" tasks. If the request does not clearly need this kind of report, do not use this skill. Do not use for a literature review over published papers. This skill collects evidence from the open web. A request for the literature on a biomedical, clinical, life-science, or other scientific topic — papers, studies, trials, preprints — belongs to firecrawl-research-papers, which queries Firecrawl's paper index (PubMed, bioRxiv, medRxiv, arXiv) instead of searching websites.

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 the user asks to fix open failing reviews, invokes $roborev-fix, or provides job IDs; do not use when the user only pastes review findings with no request to discover or close reviews

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 the user asks to fix open failing reviews, invokes /roborev-fix, or provides job IDs; do not use when the user only pastes review findings with no request to discover or close reviews

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。

Expert code reviewer. Analyze PR changes for correctness, security, performance, and quality. Returns findings as JSON. CRITICAL: this skill is costly, don't use it unless user explicitly requested to use 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。

Use when semgrep, osv-scanner, github-security or snyk MCP tools appear in your tool list - what each server is for, how to call it safely, what data leaves the machine, and how its findings are triaged

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 your context carries "The approved design this task builds" - comparing the running UI with the approved hand-off and mockup at each width and state, evidence screenshots attached to the task, Blocker/High/Medium/Nitpick findings and which of them fail the round

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 task is in code_review - how to read the diff, which findings block, and the verdict move

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。

How to work a task returned with review, QA or UAT findings. Use when a task is in need_revision or PR review comments are in your context.

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。

Inspect and diagnose minimal-zine posters, photo restyles, editorial images, and social-card series for subject preservation, factual and text integrity, composition, paper realism, print-process coherence, color signal, anti-AI craft, platform fit, and series continuity. Use when the user asks whether an image has高级感, feels AI-generated, matches Paper Signal or gc-minimal-zine quality, needs improvement, or should be regenerated. Returns evidence-based findings and a targeted correction prompt; regenerates only when the user also asks for a fix.

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。

Systematically explore and test a web application to find bugs, UX issues, and other problems. Use when asked to "dogfood", "QA", "exploratory test", "find issues", "bug hunt", "test this app/site/platform", or review the quality of a web application. Produces a structured report with full reproduction evidence -- step-by-step screenshots, repro videos, and detailed repro steps for every issue -- so findings can be handed directly to the responsible teams.

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。

Runs security audits on codebases — full scans, diff reviews, threat models, vulnerability triage, remediation guidance, and finding tracking. Activate when the user says "security scan", "audit this repo", "review this PR for security", "threat model", "triage vulnerabilities", "fix this vuln", or "track 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。

Reusable 3-round self-challenge + arbiter pattern for filtering false positives from findings/verdicts. Use when the cost of a false-positive gate block exceeds the cost of ~4 extra LLM turns.

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。

Sets up, checks or changes the optional Jev judge, the TypeSafe decision model that ship-check asks about review findings (is this real harm, is a small one worth fixing now, what proof does a small fix need). Shows whether it is on for each repo, which key it uses, switches it on or off, and sends one test request. Runs only when the user types 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。

Reviews a GitHub pull request or focused branch diff for correctness, regressions, security, compatibility, test gaps, and maintainability. Use when an implementation needs an independent source-aware review before merge. Produces prioritized findings with evidence and actionable fixes. Not for architecture-only audits, formatting preferences, or processing existing 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。

Validates a running application, CLI, API, service, or generated artifact as a user or operator against a prewritten observable behavior contract while remaining source-blind. Use for acceptance checks, runtime proof, anti-fake probes, release smoke tests, or an independent companion to code review. Not for source-quality findings, root-cause diagnosis, or visual design judgment outside the 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。

This skill should be used when a session's job is to DRIVE OPEN PRs TO MERGE rather than to write new code — "close out the open PRs", "review and fix the open PRs", "what's blocking our PRs", "which PRs are mergeable". It owns the In Review column: it reads each PR's gate status, verifies and fixes review findings on PRs OTHER sessions built, replies in-thread, and stops at the merge gate for the user's per-PR approval. Do NOT load it for building a feature and opening its PR — that is a build session (`genesis-development`).

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。

Defines CC-* code rules and waivers. Use when mapping lint findings to rule IDs or tracking complexity mass, erosion, and verbosity across changes.

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 from a spec or plan: extract stories, build in safe waves, test, commit, and get peer review per story. Use for "implement", "build/code this plan", or targeted fix findings. If no plan exists, use /ship:design first.

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。

Reviewing code via multi-engine orchestration (Claude + Codex) on three axes — secure, correct, and lean — shipping only findings worth fixing. Use for PR review or pre-commit. Complements Zen.

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。

Package sketch design findings into a persistent project skill for future build conversations

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。

Package spike findings into a persistent project skill for future build conversations

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。