「repo」の検索結果

This skill should be used when analyzing bug ticket data to identify quality trends, assess software quality status, and provide improvement recommendations. Use when a user provides bug lists (CSV, Excel, JSON, or Markdown format) and needs comprehensive quality analysis from a QA manager perspective. Generates statistical analysis, identifies quality hotspots, provides actionable recommendations, and produces professional Markdown reports suitable for project managers and executive leadership. Ideal for IT system development, migration, and implementation projects.

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。

Cross-reference project artifacts (WBS, meeting minutes, requirements docs) by date, participant, and action items. Extract commitments from meeting minutes and link to WBS tasks. Generate traceability reports showing which decisions were captured in which documents.

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 creating bug/defect reports during system testing. Use this skill when you discover a bug, need to document test failures, or want to create comprehensive bug tickets with proper reproduction steps, severity assessment, and environment details. Guides users through interactive questioning to gather all necessary information and generates professional bug ticket documents in Markdown format. Supports Japanese (default) and English.

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。

Coordinate Codex work across the current task, internal subagents, user-owned tasks, worktrees, handoffs, formal review gates, or recurring automation. Use for delegation, parallel roles, another Codex task, cross-repo work, QA/review handoffs, scheduled follow-up, or task inspection and continuation. Chinese triggers include 子Agent/子进程/子对话, 另一个对话接手, 并行处理, 分给QA, 多仓库收口, 巡检, 持续推进, 定时自动继续, 创建/读取/转交任务.

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 evaluating, designing, drafting, revising, stress-testing, or preparing academic articles, empirical research reports, literature reviews, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, journal submissions, reviewer responses, research methods, sampling, measurement, analysis, publication readiness, or citation/source audits.

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 advising, planning, reviewing, reporting, operating, or improving CTO and technology leadership work across strategy, cybersecurity management, SME/COE, functional and technical requirements, framework selection, people, organization, delivery, risk, KPI, roadmap, budgeting, governance, audit, R&D, stakeholder communication, culture, politics, and sector-specific leadership.

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。

調査結果や分析レポートを4層構造（エグゼクティブサマリー→概要→詳細→Appendix）で整理し、意思決定者向けに構造化する。レポート作成、既存ドキュメントの再構成、経営層向け報告書の作成に使用する。Do NOT use for ナレッジベースへの情報保存（knowledge-baseを使用すること）。

Typosquat and malicious-package detection across installed dependencies (or a single prospective addition) — cross-checks AI-malware family intelligence, package-name similarity to known popular packages, low maintainer-health signals. Use when auditing a freshly-onboarded repo, vetting a single suspicious package, gating CI on supply-chain risk, or investigating an incident.

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。

Terraform / OpenTofu / Nix / k8s manifest misconfiguration detection — open security groups, missing encryption, public S3/GCS, IAM wildcards, plaintext secrets, missing tags. Use when reviewing an IaC PR, gating `terraform apply` / `tofu apply`, auditing existing state for drift, or building a compliance report for cloud configuration.

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。

Post-fix verification — re-scan the repo, gate on `--exploits weaponized --severity high`, recheck the specific CVE against the new installed version, write the verdict to `.vulnetix/memory.yaml`. Use when confirming a fix landed, validating a version bump did not introduce regressions, or producing a clean-scan attestation for compliance.

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 CycloneDX 1.7 and/or SPDX 2.3 SBOMs for the repo, optionally cosign-signed, optionally cross-validated against syft output. Use when producing an SBOM for compliance, attaching to a release artefact, integrating with an SBOM registry, or satisfying a customer attestation request.

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。

Pick one open GitHub issue off this repository's queue, implement the fix, and open a pull request for it. One issue and one PR per run. Use when the user asks to burn down the issue backlog, or when the issue-burndown workflow invokes it. It never merges, never closes an issue, never edits .github/workflows/, and never acts on an issue from outside the organisation unless a maintainer has opted it in.

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 a set of Rosetta Stone attribute mappings to a Narrative dataset by wrapping them in a one-shot workflow that calls the `CreateRosettaStoneMappingsIfNotExist` task. Consumes the structured output of `/generate-rosetta-stone-mappings`, normalizes the generator's snake_case to the workflow task's camelCase, re-validates every expression against the dataset's current schema, gates on user approval, submits via `narrative_workflows_create`, polls the triggered run, and reports per-mapping created / conflict / failed. Use when: "apply these mappings to dataset N", "create the Rosetta Stone mappings I just generated", "push the mappings I saved earlier to <dataset>", "productionize this mapping list", "submit the suggested_mappings array". (narrative-common)

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。

Compare standardized metrics across multiple ego-benchmark-harness runs by recalculating them from tasks.jsonl and session JSONL, never from HTML reports. Covers overall aggregates (success rate/average score), Odysseys per-rubric pass rates, duration distributions (avg/p50/p90/max), turns/tools/cost, error and exception counts, per-task success matrices, helper distributions, and the share of DOM operations. Use whenever users ask to compare data or metrics across runs, calculate aggregate/Odysseys/duration/turn/error/helper metrics, inspect differences among runs, or compare multiple rwb/real-world-bench runs. Use pi-session-analyzer instead for deep forensic analysis of why an individual task was slow or failed.

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 self-contained HTML/CSS benchmark and comparison charts in an ego-inspired Browser-Native Editorial style. Use for blue-white product metrics, model benchmarks, A/B comparisons, efficiency reports, difficulty breakdowns, and compact technical data panels.

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。

Choose the design and the numbers a research run can honestly claim — write the structured METHOD RECORD (databases, date of access, search string, criteria, screening counts) that r0 validates, pick the claim strength a design can actually carry, record a statistic as data rather than prose, route to the reporting guideline the design owes, and decide what to preregister. Use when a run's question, design, search or statistics have to be settled before the writing, or when a claim needs a strength or a number attached to 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。

Work the verification ladder of a research run with rs_verify — read the ladder report before claiming anything is checked, run the two file rungs (r1-record, r2-locate) that need no reader, record the r3-support verdicts and strength verdicts that only a reader can make, tell a miss from an inconclusive, and know what a clean build will still refuse. Use when a document is written and about to be called checked, when a claim's quote does not match its source, or when a gate or build answers with an integrity refusal.

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 a research project as a folder on disk — open the run root first, record the user's own instruction verbatim, open the two frame gates and stop for the human to answer them, and keep the stage the ledger says it is. Use when the user asks to start, resume or check a research run, a paper, a review, a brief, a report, a literature review or a protocol.

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。

Work the review of a research run with rs_review — read the manuscript and record the panel's concerns with the evidence that grounds each one, keep the author's reply and the re-review's finding in their separate columns, run the devil's advocate with the concession threshold the tool enforces, and write the panel report and traceability matrix a response-to-reviewers letter is built from. Use when a document is ready for review, when a concern has to be answered or re-reviewed, or when an attack or a concession is being recorded.

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。

Re-verify active offers vs official sources, fix drifted terms, refresh evidence, then issue, PR, review, merge unattended; report-only/no-merge modes. Use for daily checks or stale-content issues. Don't use for adding or editing one offer, 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。

Acceptance-test newly added features using browser automation, happy-path flows, screenshots, UX notes, and a written report. Use when asked to test a feature, verify a recent UI change, or check whether an app workflow works.

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 exploratory testing on a website using browser automation, covering user journeys, forms, errors, accessibility, responsiveness, performance, and security basics. Use when asked to QA a site, explore an app, find bugs, or produce a browser testing 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。

Two-phase code quality skill: (1) review codebase for structural smells — file LOC, method LOC, accidental complexity, test readability — producing a structured report, then (2) fix all smells via provable refactorings with ACN micro commits and green-bar-at-all-times discipline. Use this skill when the user says 'sweep', 'code review', 'find code smells', 'check method lengths', 'review for complexity', 'tidy up the codebase', 'refactor smells', or asks about long methods, test readability, or accidental complexity. Also trigger when users ask to 'clean up' or 'improve code quality' across multiple files.

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 implementing a new function, adding a feature, fixing a bug, refactoring with test coverage, or writing a new test. Enforces strict outside-in red-green-refactor TDD with one-failure-per-turn discipline, predict-the-failure-before-every-run checks, hardcode-first minimum changes, triangulation, and property-based testing for large input spaces. Triggers on explicit TDD requests and on any task phrased as "implement", "add", "write a function", "build a feature", or "fix a bug" in a test-capable codebase. Reports red/green validation 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。