「leak」の検索結果

MUST USE for any real runtime debugging across ANY language or binary — crashes, silent failures, wrong responses, stuck processes, memory leaks, async misbehavior, unexplained timing, reverse engineering. Runs a hypothesis-driven loop: form ≥3 hypotheses, investigate in parallel, after 2 failed rounds spawn Oracles from orthogonal angles, confirm root cause, lock with a failing test, fix minimally, QA by actually USING the system, scrub artifacts. The actual HOW lives in `references/` — READ THEM. Triggers: 'debug this', 'why is X not working', 'hanging', 'attach a debugger', 'reverse engineer', 'pwndbg', 'gdb', 'lldb', 'node inspect', 'tsx debug', 'pdb', 'dlv', 'delve', 'rust-gdb', 'set a breakpoint', 'context window exploded', 'why is the response empty', 'attach the debugger', 'debug it', 'why is this happening', 'trace this bug', 'reproduce and fix', 'silent failure', 'HTTP 200 but empty', 'why did it stop', 'inspect the binary', 'reverse engineering', 'playwright'.

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。

Mechanical consistency check for game design — answers "is the design consistent with itself?" — plus changed-scope impact analysis across all three GDD axes: systems, flows, and content types. Offline and deterministic: greps the facts registry against the documents (numbers, terms, IDs, duplicate & dangling references, roster↔disk, map freshness, Depends 3-way, status/version, AC presence, placeholder leaks, flow & content schema), and from a git diff computes which dependent systems, flows, and content a change affects. Scope is inferred: a named document checks that document; an unverified diff triggers a changed-scope pass; otherwise everything. Use when the user wants a consistency or impact check, e.g. "verify the design", "what did this change affect", "find broken references in the design". Conflicts triage into four tracks; the entailed fixes hand off to /unikit-gd-apply in one pass. This is the mechanical pass — for a subjective "is this design good" quality critique use /unikit-gd-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。

Evidence-first ECC Tools burn and billing audit workflow. Use when investigating runaway PR creation, quota bypass, premium-model leakage, duplicate jobs, or GitHub App cost spikes in the ECC Tools repo.

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 code against NASA JPL's Power of Ten rules, extended for AI-assisted development. Use when checking code for dangerous complexity, unsafe control flow, resource leaks, hidden side effects, missing validation, weak CI gates, AI-generated artifacts, or missing failure-mode tests.

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。

Opinionated house conventions for NestJS backends — module boundaries and layering, provider wiring and injection scopes, guards/interceptors/pipes/filters, DTOs and validation, domain exceptions, config, and the Nest 11 / Express 5 behaviour that compiles cleanly and fails at runtime. Use whenever the code is NestJS (`@nestjs/*` in package.json, or `@Module`/`@Injectable`/`@Controller`/`@Cron` in the file), including when the question sounds like plain TypeScript, an OOP refactor, a code review, or an ops problem — the Nest-specific answer differs from the generic one. Typical asks: scaffolding a module, adding a controller, provider, or endpoint, wiring an enhancer, a boot-time DI or circular-import failure, a response leaking entity fields despite `@Exclude()`, a cron job firing on every replica, upgrading NestJS, or reviewing a Nest diff. Not for plain Express or Fastify, Angular, frontend, SQL, or CI.

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。

Before building anything, map where time and money leak.

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。

Red team security mode for OpenClaw. Runs an adversarial audit on demand or nightly — checks exposed ports, credential leaks, file permissions, suspicious processes, and OpenClaw config posture. Assigns a letter grade. Built for macOS deployments.

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 cryptographic code to detect operations that leak secret data through execution timing variations.

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。

Perform comprehensive technical reviews of Ruby on Rails applications. Runs automated analysis tools (RubyCritic, Brakeman, bundler-audit, Gitleaks, Debride, linters, SimpleCov, Rails stats, Rails ERD), analyzes code for architecture, security, authorization (Pundit/CanCanCan), dead code, and design issues, and produces a structured markdown report with prioritized findings and a 0-10 score. Use when the user requests a tech review, code audit, project assessment, or quality analysis of a Rails application.

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 and fix flaky tests. Covers race conditions, timing issues, test pollution, async leaks.

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 the repository for hardcoded secrets, exposed API keys, insecure network configurations, and vulnerable dependencies. Use when the user asks for a security audit, secret detection, credential scan, vulnerability check, or wants to find leaked tokens in the codebase.

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。

Stop AI agents from secretly bypassing your rules. Mechanical enforcement with git hooks, secret detection, deployment verification, and import registries. Born from real production incidents: server crashes, token leaks, code rewrites. Works with Claude Code, Clawdbot, Cursor. Install once, enforce forever.

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 the code for vulnerabilities, leaked secrets and risky dependencies before it ships.

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 repair a project's .gitignore. Composes the baseline must-ignore set (the single source of truth in baseline-ignores.json) with optional gitignore.io enrichment, and merges add-only so existing entries are never lost. Use when a repo has no .gitignore, when the commit-leak guard reports a gap, or when onboarding a new stack. Trigger: "set up gitignore", "fix my gitignore", "ignore node_modules/secrets", "gitignore for <stack>".

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 security auditor for AI Skills and Bundles. Performs non-intrusive static analysis to identify malicious patterns, data leaks, system stability risks, and obfuscated payloads across Windows, macOS, Linux/Unix, and Mobile (Android/iOS).

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 CPU usage is high, memory grows unboundedly, goroutines leak, mutex contention shows in traces, or escape analysis suggests excess heap allocation. Triggers: net/http/pprof endpoint exposure, go tool pprof analysis, flamegraph generation, allocs vs inuse_space heap profiles, runtime/trace event timeline, mutex profiling, block profiling, goroutine dumps, GC pressure measurement. NOT for non-Go languages, distributed tracing (use OpenTelemetry skill), or production telemetry pipelines.

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。

Practical security review and hardening guidance for application code in Python, JavaScript/TypeScript, and Go. Use this skill whenever the user asks for a security review or audit, wants to harden authentication (password hashing, sessions, JWT, OAuth2/OIDC, MFA), fix OWASP Top 10 issues (injection, XSS, IDOR, CSRF, SSRF, deserialization), threat-model with STRIDE, clean up secrets and .env handling, or set up dependency scanning (pip-audit, npm audit, osv-scanner, gitleaks, SBOM). Also trigger for "make this secure", "is this safe to deploy", bcrypt/argon2id, rate limiting logins, RBAC/ABAC, CSP and security headers, cookie flags, and secure-by-default coding help.

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。

Measure real frontend performance — Core Web Vitals (LCP, CLS, INP), page-load traces, CPU and network throttling, Lighthouse accessibility/SEO scores, and heap growth — using chrome-devtools-mcp against a live browser. Trigger when asked "is the page fast enough", "measure Core Web Vitals", "why is this route slow", "run Lighthouse", "check for a memory leak", before any performance-gated certification (Built for Shopify, Core Web Vitals thresholds, store listing review), and before any launch or traffic-multiplier event. Measurement only — this skill never drives functional journeys.

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 diagnosing where a SaaS or product funnel leaks — visitor → signup → activation → paid → retained — channel-agnostic, conversion-rate-driven.

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 mapping funnel-stage to content shape — conversion-pathway, content-as-system, leverage-point selection. Triggers on 'design our content funnel', 'why does mid-funnel leak'.

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。

技术文本残留评审过程、草稿引用或推理旁白时使用。

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。

Perform passive reconnaissance and leak intelligence collection with no direct contact to target systems.

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。

Semantic audit of the IDD instruction corpus for leaked session context, cross-file contradictions, fresh-memory completability gaps, automation blockers, and restatement-discipline drift. Use on request to audit .github/instructions, the issue-authoring skill bundle, and the installed agent entry files (CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, GEMINI.md, .github/copilot-instructions.md). Read-only — never edits files or mutates issues.

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。

Produces a deep, honest peer-review of how someone uses Claude Code by statistically analyzing their local session data (~/.claude/usage-data/ and ~/.claude/projects/). Trigger whenever the user asks to review, analyze, audit, or critique their own Claude Code usage, workflow, habits, or skill level — including phrases like "analyze my cc usage", "review my cc sessions", "peer review my cc workflow", "deeper than /insights", or any ask for an honest audit of their AI workflow. Also covers portfolio/hiring-manager framings (e.g. "portfolio for Anthropic/OpenAI/xAI"), but ALWAYS ask the user in Step 0 which version to build (self / hr / both) before running — never silently produce an HR report, because that version goes to outsiders and needs explicit privacy setup. The HTML report is laid out ledger-first for SELF (opening band, output/team/leak/trend ledgers, then peer review, 9-dim scoring, try-this-week, case study, claim-indexed evidence). The HR variant is a recruiter version v1: identity card, earned badges (threshold-based, earned-only), allowlist-filtered output ledger, one case study, and a methodology & scope disclosure — no scores, no peer-review memo, no charts.

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。