「missing」の検索結果

Reasoning data lost across agent steps and missing low-confidence fallback Keywords: sqlite, triangulation, escalation, confidence

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。

High concurrent SQLite access causing lock contention and missing indexes Keywords: sqlite, wal, indexes, performance

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。

Detect available development tools at session start. Saves to .agent/tools.json and warns about missing required tools. Works with or without aoc CLI 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。

Create bulletproof Terms of Service and Privacy Policy documents for SaaS applications. Infers company information from codebase/marketing site, conducts comprehensive audits, drafts documents, then asks user ONLY for missing details at the end. Minimizes user interaction. Use when the user needs to draft, review, or update legal documents (ToS, Terms of Service, Privacy Policy, legal pages). Triggers on requests for legal documents, terms drafting, privacy policy creation, "cover our bases legally", liability protection, or legal compliance for software products.

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 top-level documentation (README, SPEC, PRODUCT) against recent git history to find drift shipped features missing from docs or features listed as upcoming that already landed. Proposes minimal edits, creates a branch, and opens a PR. Use when asked to review docs for accuracy, after major feature merges, or on a periodic schedule.

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 wants papers to consider for a graph gap or missing evidence need.

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 missing documentation from scratch for a feature, module, or entire project. (gstack).

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 content against your brand voice, style guide, and messaging pillars, flagging deviations by severity with specific before/after fixes. Use when checking a draft before it ships, when auditing copy for voice consistency and terminology, or when screening for unsubstantiated claims, missing disclaimers, and other legal flags.

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 code changes for security, performance, and correctness. Trigger with a PR URL or diff, "review this before I merge", "is this code safe?", or when checking a change for N+1 queries, injection risks, missing edge cases, or error handling gaps.

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。

Ask the minimum clarifying questions before implementing when scope, constraints, or success criteria are unclear. Use when a request has multiple plausible interpretations, missing acceptance criteria, or ambiguous environment constraints.

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 forecasting models with Meta's Prophet for business time series with holidays and changepoints. Use this skill when the user needs user-friendly time series forecasting, handling of missing data and holidays, or automatic changepoint detection — even if they say 'forecast with Prophet', 'business forecast', or 'easy time series model'.".

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。

Audits whether a machine-readable regelrecht law model is faithful to the LETTER of the wettekst — and strictly separates the wettekst (leading) from the toelichting (Nota/Memorie van Toelichting; explanatory, not a norm). Runs in critical passes per article/lid and detects four deviation classes: toelichting-bleed (a modeled criterion that the letter only states as an open norm, or not at all), missing verbatim elements (a word/condition such as a "tenzij" or a qualifier dropped from the model), wrong legal_basis anchoring (an endpoint hung on a "kapstok"-article while the operative norm lives elsewhere), and verbatim-drift in text: (an ingetrokken/older redaction). Also detects positief-lid vs uitsluitings-lid conflicts and checks the chapeau for an explicit derogation rule ("zo nodig in afwijking van het eerste lid") before judging precedence. Classifies every finding as modelfout (fix), wettekst-gevolg (report, do not fix), or letter-vs-toelichting-question (jurist decides what is leading + revision signal). Use when the user wants to know if a model is "dicht bij de letter", mentions letter vs toelichting/bedoeling, fidelity, "natuurgetrouw", or before trusting feature outcomes.

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 research writing, reviews, rebuttals, or related-work planning needs academic evidence. Searches literature, screens candidate papers, audits novelty and missing work, verifies DOI/BibTeX/reference metadata and citation authenticity, and checks whether sources support the stated 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。

Diagnoses and fixes issues in Atlassian Forge apps. Use this skill whenever a Forge app has errors, crashes, shows blank UI, fails to deploy, doesn't appear after installation, has permission issues, or produces unexpected output. Trigger on any mention of forge logs, forge deploy errors, resolver errors, blank panels, missing scopes, Custom UI not rendering, production vs dev discrepancies, or any Jira/Confluence app that "stopped working". Also trigger when the user asks to debug, troubleshoot, investigate, or fix a Forge app issue — even if they haven't used the word "Forge" but describe a Jira panel or Confluence macro acting up.

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。

Standardize incoming legal or commercial contract requests into request type, missing information, priority, and review queue. Use when the work is intake routing and request cleanup. Do not use for clause interpretation, negotiation strategy, or legal advice on the agreement itself.

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 changes with a risk-first mindset that prioritizes bugs, regressions, missing tests, and operational gaps.

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。

Write custom Semgrep rules to identify organization-specific logic flaws, improper cryptography usage, or missing authorization checks during source code review. This skill focuses on moving beyond default rulesets to locate complex 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。

Identify and exploit logical flaws in OAuth 2.0 and OpenID Connect workflows. Use this skill when testing "Sign in with Google/Facebook/Apple" features, focusing on Authorization Code interception, Implicit flow token leakage, standard CSRF bypassing via missing `state` parameters, and redirect logic flaws.

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。

Deep OAuth 2.0 / OpenID Connect security assessment. Covers the full attack surface: redirect_uri validation bypass (path traversal, open redirect chains, subdomain confusion, URL parsing tricks, parameter pollution, response mode switching), missing/broken state parameter CSRF, PKCE downgrade and absent-challenge attacks, implicit grant token leakage (Referer, browser history, XSS fragment theft), authorization code injection, scope escalation, client confusion attacks, mutable-claims account takeover (iss+sub confusion, email-keyed identity merging), pre-account takeover via unverified registration, OpenID Connect dynamic client registration SSRF (logo_uri, jwks_uri, sector_identifier_uri, request_uri), nonce replay, ID token validation failures, Device Code phishing flow, mobile custom URI scheme hijacking, refresh token persistence, token introspection enumeration, consent screen clickjacking, host header injection, and cross-IdP mix-up attacks. Uses KOAuth, jwt_tool, nuclei oauth templates, and manual http(action="request", ...) payloads. Every technique includes actual request payloads and verification logic. Chains from /pentester or /api-security when OAuth endpoints are discovered. Chains into /web-exploit for open redirect, XSS, and SSRF chaining. Chains into /post-exploit when full account takeover is achieved. Chains into /credential-audit when access tokens or refresh tokens are recovered.

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。

Exploit weak password reset and change flows via CSRF on reset forms, cross-user password modification by swapping username parameters, token predictability in reset links, reset displaying old password in plaintext (revealing weak storage), missing current-password verification on change forms, and session hijacker lockout via passwordless change. Test with Burp Suite, OWASP ZAP following OWASP Forgot Password Cheat Sheet.

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。

Detects code quality vulnerabilities in mobile apps (Android/iOS). Trigger on: SQL injection in SQLite, JavaScript injection in WebViews, intent injection, unsafe deserialization, NSKeyedUnarchiver, NSCoding, Java serialization, Parcelable, buffer overflow, JNI native code, PIE disabled, NX disabled, stack canary absent, RELRO, ARC disabled, third-party library CVE, vulnerable dependency, outdated SDK, targetSdkVersion, update enforcement missing, implicit Intent, URL loading in WebView, object persistence, memory corruption, OWASP dependency check. Covers MASVS-CODE-1/2/3/4.

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。

IDOR and broken object authorization testing playbook. Use when requests expose object identifiers, tenant boundaries, writable fields, or missing object-level authorization checks.

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 testing JWT-based authentication for algorithm confusion, alg:none bypass, weak HMAC secrets, missing expiration, kid parameter injection, and token storage in localStorage. Trigger on: Authorization: Bearer tokens, JWTs in cookies, any base64url encoded header.payload.signature pattern, OAuth2 access tokens, API authentication tokens, SSO tokens, JWKS endpoints. Detects RS256→HS256 confusion, public key as HMAC secret, unverified kid values used in file reads or SQL queries, and JWT cracking with short secrets.

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-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) tricks authenticated users into submitting forged requests to a target application by exploiting browser automatic cookie attachment. Detect via missing or predictable CSRF tokens in state-changing requests (POST/PUT/DELETE), absent `SameSite` cookie attributes, and JSON endpoints accepting `text/plain` Content-Type. Test using HTML auto-submitting forms, XHR requests, and CORS-enabled fetch. Tools: Burp Suite (Generate CSRF PoC), OWASP ZAP.

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。