「structural analysis」の検索結果

Review a PR or branch diff using the knowledge graph for full structural context. Outputs a structured review with blast-radius analysis.

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。

Develop evidence-backed structural and architectural security hardening proposals from vulnerability disclosures, supplied findings, incident or assessment documents, source code, or a completed Codex Security scan. Use when a user asks for systemic improvements, alternatives beyond per-finding patches, before-and-after security architecture views, engineering tradeoff analysis, or an implementation-ready plan for a selected hardening option. Also use automatically after a Codex Security scan with reportable findings when the top-level scan workflow requests final-report hardening guidance.

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。

Structural feedback on a legal writing draft (memo, brief, paper, exam essay) — organization, analysis depth, clarity, citation form. NEVER rewrites the draft. Use when the user says "feedback on my memo", "read my draft", or "critique my brief".

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。

Develop evidence-backed structural and architectural security hardening proposals from vulnerability disclosures, supplied findings, incident or assessment documents, source code, or a completed Codex Security scan. Use when a user asks for systemic improvements, alternatives beyond per-finding patches, before-and-after security architecture views, engineering tradeoff analysis, or an implementation-ready plan for a selected hardening option. Also use automatically after a Codex Security scan with reportable findings when the top-level scan workflow requests final-report hardening guidance.

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。

Feature planning and implementation with 4 adaptive phases (Specify, Design, Tasks, Execute). Auto-sizes depth by complexity. Writes testable requirements in EARS notation, atomic tasks, atomic Conventional Commits, and requirement traceability. Ships deterministic Python validation scripts so structural gates are enforced by code, not memory. Features an independent Verifier (author != verifier, evidence-or-zero), a discrimination sensor, a decision log (STATE.md), a test-coverage matrix, and a self-improving lessons layer. Stack-agnostic and tool-agnostic. Use when (1) planning features, (2) implementing with verification and atomic commits, (3) validating an implementation against a spec. Triggers on "specify feature", "discuss feature", "design", "tasks", "implement", "validate", "verify work", "UAT", "record decision", "pause work", "resume work". Do NOT use for pure architecture decomposition analysis or standalone technical design 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。

Retrieve and analyze AlphaFold predicted structures for a protein. Use when the user provides a specific UniProt Accession ID and wants structural confidence metrics (pLDDT), domain boundary analysis, or disorder assessment. Do not use if the user only has a protein name, gene name, or amino acid sequence — ask for a UniProt ID 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。

Visualize, analyze, and render protein and molecular structures using PyMOL. Use when the user wants to create images of protein structures, perform structural alignments or superposition, measure distances or contacts, highlight binding sites or active site residues, color by B-factor/pLDDT, or analyze protein-ligand interactions. Do not use for docking, molecular dynamics, or sequence-only analysis.

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。

A comprehensive auditor for any agent skill — including Manus, OpenClaw/ClawHub, Claude, LobeHub, or custom SKILL.md-based skills. Use this skill whenever a user wants to evaluate, audit, review, score, or quality-check an agent skill before publishing, updating, or deploying. Covers two hard veto gates (structural redlines + research integrity redlines), static quality scoring across 25 criteria (ISO 25010 + OpenSSF + Agent), dynamic test input generation, multi-mode execution testing, multi-layer output evaluation with five specialized category rubrics (Evidence Insight / Protocol Design / Data Analysis / Academic Writing / Other), a Research Veto that applies to all four research categories, human eval viewer generation, actionable P0/P1/P2 optimization recommendations, and automatic skill improvement that outputs a polished, production-ready SKILL.md. Also use whenever a user says "audit my skill", "evaluate my skill", "improve my skill", or wants a corrected version after evaluation.

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。

Compress tool outputs, logs, and JSON before they enter the context window — structural compression via a deterministic stdlib script (schema + samples + stats instead of 300 raw rows), no API, no summarization loss. Use when asked shrink this tool output, my context is full of JSON, compress these logs before analysis, or stop wasting tokens on raw data. Produces the crushed artifact with its token math shown, the crush-or-keep decision rules, and the fetch-the-original escape hatch.

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 analyze pangenomes for prokaryotes (Panaroo, PPanGGOLiN, PEPPAN, GET_HOMOLOGUES, anvi'o pangenomics) and eukaryotes (Minigraph-Cactus, PGGB, vg pangenome graphs). Implement Tettelin core/accessory/cloud genome decomposition (Tettelin 2005), Heap's law open/closed pangenome modeling, gene presence/absence GWAS (Scoary, pyseer), pangenome graph variant calling (vg, PanGenie), and structural-variation graph indexing. Use when assembling species- or genus-level pan-gene catalogs, separating core from accessory/shell/cloud genes, testing gene-content associations with phenotypes, building pangenome graphs from haplotype-resolved assemblies, calling SVs from pangenome graphs, or selecting between bacterial-pangenome and eukaryotic-pangenome workflows.

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。

Installs 425 bioinformatics skills covering sequence analysis, RNA-seq, single-cell, variant calling, metagenomics, structural biology, and 56 more categories. Use when setting up bioinformatics capabilities or when a bioinformatics task requires specialized skills not yet installed.

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。

Fits structural equation models to GWAS summary statistics using GenomicSEM (Grotzinger 2019), including common-factor models, confirmatory factor models, ESEM, common-factor GWAS with Q_SNP heterogeneity, multivariate Wald tests, and stratified GenomicSEM partitioned heritability. Reconciles results against MTAG multi-trait analysis. Handles sample overlap via the LDSC sampling-covariance matrix, identifies and resolves Heywood cases, and verifies model fit with CFI / RMSEA. Use when modeling latent genetic architecture across correlated traits, running multivariate GWAS on a shared factor, distinguishing factor-mediated from trait-specific SNP effects, or comparing GenomicSEM common-factor results against MTAG when both depend on accurate sampling covariance.

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。

Record a dated snapshot of the vault's health numbers and compare against previous snapshots so trends are visible. Use this skill for a monthly or quarterly check, when the user asks whether the vault is improving, or asks to track its numbers over time. Do NOT use for a one-off graph analysis, which is second-brain-graph, or for structural repairs.

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。

Architectural style selection decision matrices, trade-off analysis, structural enforcement rules, and combination patterns. Load when choosing or evaluating architecture styles.

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。

Assess project-wide structural technical debt: complexity hotspots, deprecated API usage, duplication clusters, architecture rot, and low-value tests. Ranks findings by impact and refactor effort into a report at .turbo/technical-debt.md. Use when the user asks to "assess technical debt", "find technical debt", "review technical debt", "what should we refactor", "find refactoring candidates", "where is the code rot", "what's our worst code", "find low-value tests", or "which tests can we delete". Analysis-only — does not modify 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。

Use code-review-graph for local-first CLI/MCP code knowledge graphs, graph-backed code review, structural search, and repository-analysis integrations.

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 human-readable, progressive-disclosure overview of unfamiliar code or a pull request's changes — why it exists (the real problem it solves or goal it serves for the business or a user), and from there what it does, how it flows, and where to start — so you can get up to speed before working on or reviewing it. Use when you want to understand, get oriented in, make sense of, explain, or get up to speed on a chunk of code, a file, a directory, a symbol, or a PR's changes. Writes the overview to a scratch file and changes no code. Does not review code quality or raise findings — use code-review for auditing changes or post-code-review-to-pr for posting them. Does not produce durable feature or system documentation — use project-documentation. Does not assess architecture or structural risk — use architectural-analysis. Does not diagnose bugs or root-cause failures — use investigate. Does not pace a person through the code one step at a time in conversation — use code-walkthrough.

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 a standalone test plan by analyzing code for test coverage gaps and edge cases. Use when you need to create, generate, or draft a test plan for a branch, need to analyze test coverage, or need to identify what tests to write for specific files or directories. Does not produce a plain-language plan for a person to run tests by hand — use manual-test-planning for that. Does not write test code — use tdd to implement behavior test-first. Does not refine existing plans — use iterative-plan-review. Does not review code quality, security, or style — use code-review for full code review. Does not evaluate architectural testability or structural coupling — use architectural-analysis for architectural assessment.

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。

Recommends appropriate software design patterns based on problem descriptions, requirements, or code scenarios. Use when designing software architecture, refactoring code, solving common design problems, or choosing between design approaches. Analyzes the problem context and suggests suitable creational, structural, behavioral, architectural, or concurrency patterns with implementation guidance and trade-off analysis.

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 Jacobian's MCP operations for nontrivial mathematical computation, finite search, structural analysis, formal checking, probability, or optimization.

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 Jacobian’s typed operations when exact computation or structural analysis can help solve a mathematical problem.

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。

Think and work like an expert Mathematical Modeler. Use when a task calls for Mathematical Modeler judgment. Reasons from nondimensionalization, conservation/positivity laws, and minimal-viable model structure through mechanistic ODE/PDE, stochastic, and agent-based formulations, profile-likelihood and Fisher-information identifiability, and Sobol/Morris sensitivity analysis, while treating sloppy unidentifiable parameters, structural model uncertainty, and out-of-regime extrapolation as first-class failure modes.

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。

Think and work like an expert Geologist. Use when a task calls for Geologist judgment. Reasons from Steno's principles and Walther's Law through Brunton strike/dip, measured sections, hand-lens rock ID (QAPF/Folk/Dunham), thin-section petrography (PPL/XPL, Michel-Lévy, point counting), FGDC/GeMS geologic maps, NGMDB/Geolex/Macrostrat, and stereonet structural analysis while treating weathering, float, and map-as-hypothesis as first-class failure modes.

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。

Installs 425 bioinformatics skills covering sequence analysis, RNA-seq, single-cell, variant calling, metagenomics, structural biology, and 56 more categories. Use when setting up bioinformatics capabilities or when a bioinformatics task requires specialized skills not yet installed.

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。