3万 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Use when auditing domain authority, trust, or citation credibility; runs a peer-relative 40-item CITE profile with evidence coverage and verified manipulation/penalty veto checks. Not for page-level content quality — use content-quality-auditor; not for backlink profiling alone — use offsite-signal-analyzer. 域名权威/网站可信度
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 modern web development best practices for security, compatibility, and code quality. Use when asked to "apply best practices", "security audit", "modernize code", "code quality review", or "check 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。
Run an evidence-led web quality audit covering performance, accessibility, SEO, best practices, and agentic browsing. Use when asked to "audit my site", "review web quality", "run lighthouse audit", "check page quality", or "optimize my website".
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 measuring or improving agent quality and performance — set up evaluators, online monitoring, CI/CD quality gates, observability, or cost optimization. Triggers on: "evaluate my agent", "add evaluator", "measure quality", "quality gate", "run evals", "agent too slow", "why is it slow", "reduce latency", "set up observability", "CloudWatch dashboard", "how much does my agent cost", "cost optimization", "logs not showing up", "logs missing", "spans not found", "eval failing", "eval error", "dev traces", "local traces", "agentcore dev traces", "traces to CloudWatch". Not for debugging errors or crashes — use agents-debug. Slow but correct routes here; broken routes to debug.
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 and maintain a design system inside an Expo app - a reusable theme of design tokens (color, spacing, typography, radius, shadow, motion), reusable component structure with variant/size/state prop conventions, and rules for when to extract a repeated view into a shared component. Use when creating or organizing theme files and design tokens (theme.ts / theme/), extending an existing theme or styling library (NativeWind, Tamagui, Restyle, Unistyles) in its own idiom, standardizing styles so screens (including AI-generated ones) look consistent and polished, fixing an app that looks AI-generated or generic instead of native (the named native-slop tells), building an in-app component library, or auditing an app for design-system drift (hardcoded colors, spacing, fonts). For platform styling specifics (semantic colors, HIG rules, native controls) use expo-native-ui; for folder layout of a new app use expo-project-structure.
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。
Audit a Python project's installed dependencies for known CVEs by wrapping pip-audit (PyPA's official vulnerability auditor) and emitting findings in the canonical penetration-tester schema. Detects vulnerable direct AND transitive packages, normalizes pip-audit's severity output via OSV severity bands, falls back to pip list --outdated when pip-audit isn't installed, and supports requirements.txt, pyproject.toml (PEP 621), Pipfile.lock, and poetry.lock as input sources. Use when: pre-merge gate on a Python project, post-incident sweep after a PyPI compromise (e.g. ctx, request-toolbelt typosquats, ultralytics 8.3.42 compromise), SOC2 evidence collection, or inheriting an unfamiliar Python codebase. Threshold: any HIGH or CRITICAL CVE in the resolved dependency tree. MODERATE / LOW reported informationally. Trigger with: "audit python deps", "pip vulnerability scan", "check pypi packages for CVEs", "pip-audit run".
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。
Diagnostic-only test suite auditor. Classifies repo type, maps against 7-layer testing taxonomy (git hooks → static → unit → integration → system → E2E → acceptance), runs deterministic quality gates (coverage, mutation, CRAP, architecture, escape-scan), builds RTM / personas / journeys traceability, produces TEST_AUDIT.md, updates tests/TESTING.md, and mandatorily hands off to implement-tests when gaps are found. Use when auditing test quality, finding test gaps, or running the full 7-layer sweep. Trigger with "audit tests", "find gaps", "test audit", "check test quality", "full sweep", "7-layer audit", "rtm 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。
Analyze DEX liquidity pools for TVL, volume, fees, impermanent loss, and LP profitability. Use when analyzing liquidity pools, calculating impermanent loss, or comparing DEX pools. Trigger with phrases like "analyze liquidity pool", "calculate impermanent loss", "LP returns", "pool TVL", "DEX pool metrics", or "compare pools".
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 Abridge deployment controls across data handling, identity, devices, EHR workflows, support, auditability, and incident response. Use when conducting a security assessment or control renewal. Trigger with "audit Abridge security".
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, defensible email-spoofability verdict and SPF supply-chain risk analysis computed from published DNS alone. Deepens the record-level SPF/DMARC/DKIM/BIMI/MTA-STS/DNSSEC fetch recipes in the offensive-osint arsenal (§16.14) with the reasoning that section doesn't do: a priority-ordered composite verdict for whether an attacker can actually land header-From-spoofed mail in an inbox, and by which vector (exact-domain vs subdomain) — grounded in the single most-misunderstood distinction in email security: the envelope MAIL FROM that SPF authenticates vs the visible header From: that only DMARC governs. Explains precisely why SPF -all/~all alone is NOT spoof-proof without DMARC enforcement, and why SPF +all bypasses DMARC even under p=reject pct=100. Covers RFC 7208 §4.6.4's 10-DNS-lookup / 2-void-lookup PermError fail-open condition with a runnable stdlib-only lookup-counter script, plus the SPF-include-takeover supply-chain vector (an attacker re-registering a dead include inherits SPF-pass authority over the victim domain) with strict transient-vs-NXDOMAIN discrimination discipline so a temporary SERVFAIL is never mistaken for a takeover lead. Fully passive: DNS TXT reads only, no mail sent, no RCPT TO probe, no API keys. Use when auditing a domain's real spoofing resistance (not just its published records), explaining to a client why 'we have SPF -all' does not mean they're covered, investigating an SPF PermError or an unusually long include chain, evaluating a dead SPF include as a takeover lead, or writing a defensible spoofability finding for a deliverable.
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 a topic or finished script into a complete, publish-ready explainer video — led by an AI presenter from an authorized adult presenter image, or performed with no presenter in one of twelve explainer styles (nine visual styles and three narrative ones). Not for promos, ads, or footage montages. Use for new presenter or styled explainer videos and for continuing, revising, captioning, lip-sync repairing, or re-exporting an existing job. Use it whenever the user asks for 数字人口播 / 数字人讲解, for a 讲解视频 / 动画讲解 / 科普视频, asks which styles or templates are available (有哪些风格 / 看看风格 / 风格模板), or names one of the styles: 留白, 信号/科技感, 手帐/手绘, 立体书/纸艺, 波普漫画, 一镜到底/3D, 图纸与注脚, 黑板报, 黏土小城, 推演/动态图解, 案卷/调查复盘, 小剧场/生活场景. Keep model and provider selection capability-based and record the actual choices per job.
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。
Role profile — a reviewer who is fact-seeking, bedrock-seeking, honest, and rejecting. Demands that arguments rest on small facts that cannot be wrong (not on stacked assumptions dressed up as foundation), and that deliberately-unclear concepts be quarantined — never leaked into solid layers, never mixed with each other. Catches the failure mode where designs ship after partial grounding: most of the spec researched, the design feels finished, and the unresearched remainder holds the deal-breaker. Invoke with `/pedantic <target>` (e.g. `/pedantic review this design doc`, `/pedantic review the SDK design`, `/pedantic review this PR`). Probes cover logical structure (definitions, assumptions, boundaries, contradictions, unfalsifiability, vague quantifiers, counterexamples), epistemic honesty (researchable vs. discoverable-only-by-doing), bedrock integrity (assumed-bedrock, leaked uncertainty, mixed unclarity), and design pathology (YAGNI, wrong-layer abstraction, unclear responsibility, fragmentation, over-engineering). Use when you want a hard critique of a plan, design doc, technical doc, code change, or PR description — not a copy edit, not a vibe 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。
Converts OpenAPI 3.0 JSON/YAML to TypeScript interfaces and type guards. This skill should be used when the user asks to generate types from OpenAPI, convert schema to TS, create API interfaces, or generate TypeScript types from an API specification.
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 and improve interface usability using heuristic analysis. Use when the user mentions "usability audit", "users are confused", "form usability", "navigation problems", "Nielsen heuristics", "cognitive walkthrough", or "is this easy to use". Also trigger when reviewing a design for usability issues, improving form-completion rates, or evaluating information architecture and navigation. Covers Krug's laws, Nielsen's 10 heuristics, severity ratings, dark-pattern recognition, and accessibility. For visual design fixes, see refactoring-ui. For conversion-focused audits, see cro-methodology.
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。
AI citation readiness audit as part of SEO, covering classic Google search and AI search surfaces together. Use whenever the user wants their content to rank or be cited in ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, Copilot, You.com, Google AI Overviews, or Google AI Mode. AI citation optimization audit scoring blog posts for major answer surfaces. Evaluates passage-level citability, Q&A formatting, entity clarity, structured data, and AI crawler accessibility. Generates citation capsules and a 0-100 AI Citation Readiness score. Use when user says "geo", "ai citation", "ai optimization", "citation audit", "aeo", "perplexity optimization", "chatgpt citation".
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。
End-to-end methodology for reproducing AND patching publicly disclosed, already-fixed vulnerabilities: sourcing the advisory and the fix commit, reading the patch diff, rebuilding a pinned offline lab, building a vulnerable-vs-patched contrast harness with proper controls, minimizing the trigger, designing and validating the fix, and writing it up as a blog post or whitepaper. Use this skill whenever the user wants to reproduce, demonstrate, understand, teach, or write about a known vulnerability or security incident: "reproduce this CVE", "build a repro for", "how did EchoLeak / Log4Shell / the postmark-mcp package actually work", "show me how this exploit worked", "write a blog post about this vulnerability", "set up a lab for CVE-XXXX", "pull the NVD/CVE/OSV details", or "make a PoC I can publish". Use it just as eagerly for the patching half: "how should this be fixed", "is this patch correct", "what would have caught this", "review this security fix", "write a regression test for this CVE", "how do I backport this", or "what's the right fix for this bug class" - even when the user never says the word "reproduce". Reach for it on vague asks like "help me understand this security advisory", "I want to write about this incident", or "can we test whether we were vulnerable" when a disclosed vulnerability is in play. This skill only handles ALREADY-PATCHED, publicly disclosed issues and refuses zero-day discovery, live targets, and weaponization.
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。
Maintains the corporate record and the governance machinery — entity records, board and committee support, resolutions and minutes, delegations of authority, insurance, and business continuity. Use this to prepare board or committee materials, record a decision that needs to be minuted, set or check approval authority, review insurance and continuity coverage, establish a retention policy, or work out where a responsibility belongs when it falls between functions.
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 an extremely strict maintainability review for abstraction quality, giant files, and spaghetti-condition growth. Use for a thermo-nuclear code quality review, thermonuclear review, deep code quality audit, or especially harsh maintainability 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。
Assesses whether a medical research topic is worth starting now by separating true novelty from pseudo-novelty, auditing real feasibility under stated resource constraints, and forcing a concrete start / narrow / redesign / stop decision. Always require explicit assumptions and never fabricate references, datasets, resource availability, precedent studies, or publication 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。
Organizes the evidence and competitive landscape around a drug, target, or pathway by separating disease relevance, tractability, preclinical evidence, clinical evidence, modality fit, and crowding. Always map what is biologically supported, what is druggable, what has actually advanced, and what remains strategically open. Never confuse target relevance with druggability, preclinical activity with clinical promise, or narrative excitement with validated development maturity. Never fabricate references, trial status, approval status, company activity, or asset metadata.
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。
Classify XQUIC GitHub issues with an evidence-backed L1-L4 resolution-complexity label while keeping validity, priority, severity, and disposition separate and skipping uniquely labeled issues unless the user explicitly forces a recheck. Use when triaging one issue or a batch of issues, creating an issue-complexity backlog, or applying or correcting L1-L4 GitHub labels.
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 for general PostgreSQL table design. **Trigger when user asks to:** - Design PostgreSQL tables, schemas, or data models when creating new tables and when modifying existing ones. - Choose data types, constraints, or indexes for PostgreSQL - Create user tables, order tables, reference tables, or JSONB schemas - Understand PostgreSQL best practices for normalization, constraints, or indexing - Design update-heavy, upsert-heavy, or OLTP-style tables **Keywords:** PostgreSQL schema, table design, data types, PRIMARY KEY, FOREIGN KEY, indexes, B-tree, GIN, JSONB, constraints, normalization, identity columns, partitioning, row-level security Comprehensive reference covering data types, indexing strategies, constraints, JSONB patterns, partitioning, and PostgreSQL-specific 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。
Master smart contract security best practices to prevent common vulnerabilities and implement secure Solidity patterns. Use when writing smart contracts, auditing existing contracts, or implementing security measures for blockchain applications.
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。
You are a security expert specializing in dependency vulnerability analysis, SBOM generation, and supply chain security. Scan project dependencies across ecosystems to identify vulnerabilities, assess risks, and recommend remediation.
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。