「contract」の検索結果

Use when implementing exception mapping or RFC 9457 error responses in Spring Boot 3. Preserve an existing legacy error contract unless migration is requested.

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 exception mapping or RFC 9457 error responses in Spring Boot 4. Preserve an existing legacy error contract unless migration is requested.

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 Kafka, RabbitMQ, Pulsar, or JMS producers and consumers in Spring Boot 3. Covers event contracts, idempotency, retries, dead-letter handling, ordering, and outbox delivery.

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。

Companion to atlas-contract. Auto-invoked by its Final Audit on caught drift; also use after Post Reviews or user requests to record a mistake. Distills drift into WHEN/DON'T/INSTEAD clauses, writes to Atlas.md after confirmation.

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。

Guides stable API and interface design. Use when designing APIs, module boundaries, or any public interface. Use when creating REST or GraphQL endpoints, defining type contracts between modules, or establishing boundaries between frontend and backend.

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。

Design spec with 98 rules for building CLI tools that AI agents can safely use. Covers structured JSON output, error handling, input contracts, safety guardrails, exit codes, and agent self-description.

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, edit, validate, and run Agent QA tests, suites, and hooks through MCP or CLI while preserving canonical IDs and schema contracts.

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 the user asks for a "sensitivity reader", "authenticity reader", "cultural review", "is this portrayal okay", "real people in my novel", "defamation", "can I use song lyrics", "epigraph permission", "permissions", "quote permission", "fair use", "AI disclosure", "do I need to disclose AI", "send to my editor", "editorial round", "Word file for my editor", "editor review copy", "co-author", "collaborate on a book", "shared world", "back up my book", "does this echo my source", "similarity check", "check overlap with my earlier books", or wants to run human editorial, ethics, permissions, or collaboration workflows around a story project. NOT for contracts or selling rights (use publishing), or reader feedback rounds and review copies for readers, including the GitHub review-copy setup (use feedback-triage).

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。

Owns repositories, data sources and mapping for Compose and Compose Multiplatform apps: DTO to domain to UiModel boundaries, Ktor clients and bearer auth, WebSocket and SSE, Room, DataStore, Paging 3, offline-first and data-layer tests. Use when writing or reviewing a repository, data source, DTO, mapper, HttpClient, bearer token, WebSocket, SSE, Room DAO, migration, DataStore, PagingSource, RemoteMediator, offline cache or MockEngine test. Do NOT use for ViewModel or UI wiring (compose-feature), composables (compose-ui), the MVI contract or error tiers (compose-architecture), Gradle modules (compose-project), or commonMain vs platform splits (compose-platform).

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 writing, changing or reviewing code that touches the house contract for Jetpack Compose and Compose Multiplatform apps: module graph, MVI/BaseViewModel, error tiers, state ownership, naming, Koin DI, Navigation 3 and coroutines. The compose skill is the entry point. Do NOT use for Gradle-only work (compose-project), new screens (compose-feature), composable-only work (compose-ui), repositories or persistence (compose-data), or expect/actual splits (compose-platform).

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。

Adds, changes, or reviews a screen, sheet, dialog, or destination slice (endpoint to repository to ViewModel to UI to navigation to DI to tests) in a Compose or CMP project. Use when adding a screen, building a new feature, adding a ViewModel or destination, wiring list/detail or a form screen, scaffolding a slice, or reviewing a feature change. Covers Contract.kt, launchGuarded wiring, SavedStateHandle drafts, the state matrix, and new-feature.sh. Do NOT use for routing or architecture (compose-architecture), pure refactors, Gradle work (compose-project), recomposition or styling (compose-ui), repository or persistence work (compose-data), or expect/actual splits (compose-platform).

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。

Performs deep architectural analysis of a specified module, directory, or feature area by examining structural coupling, data flow, concurrency patterns, risk, and SOLID alignment. Use when the user wants to assess, evaluate, or review the architecture, design quality, dependency structure, coupling, cohesion, or technical debt of an existing part of the codebase. Not for investigating specific bugs, runtime errors, or failures — use investigate. Not for test planning — use automated-test-planning. Not for file-level code review — use code-review. Not for researching open-ended options, prior art, or how something works — use research. Not for designing a new interface or contract — use design-an-api. Not for planning the change its findings imply — use plan-a-change. Not for discovering bounded contexts, ubiquitous language, or where code boundaries diverge from domain boundaries — use ddd-analysis. Not for writing documentation or architectural decision records.

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。

Builds a feature specification from scratch through a relentless, evidence-based interview that walks the design tree decision-by-decision, resolving dependencies as it goes. Use when the user wants to plan, design, scope, specify, or flesh out a new feature, capability, or system behavior before implementation. Produces a feature specification focused on system behaviors, not implementation detail. Does not plan a restructure of code that already exists — use plan-a-change. Does not refine or stress-test an existing plan — use iterative-plan-review. Does not document already-built features — use project-documentation. Does not design the contract for an interface — use design-an-api. Does not research open-ended options before there is a feature to specify — use research. Does not map the bounded contexts of existing code — use ddd-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。

Builds a feature implementation plan from an existing feature specification (or equivalent context) through a facilitated team conversation. Use when the user wants to plan how to implement, build, deliver, or ship a feature that has already been specified. Does not specify what the feature should do — use plan-a-feature first. Does not design the contract for an interface — use design-an-api. Does not refine or stress-test an already-written plan — use iterative-plan-review. Runs its resolution rounds to completion and holds its questions until after they finish; to review each round as it lands, use pairing.

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 work collaboratively in reviewable pieces, handing each piece back for review before starting the next, so the person stays in the lead and steers while the work happens instead of reviewing a finished result. Use when someone says to pair with them on something, asks to collaborate rather than direct, wants to review as it goes, or wants to guide the work piece by piece — on code, on a design decision, or on writing. For a test-first build it runs tdd, for restructuring it runs refactor, for an interface contract it runs design-an-api, and for plan work it runs iterative-plan-review or plan-implementation, each collaboratively; invoke any of those directly instead to run it straight through without pausing. Does not pace someone through code that already exists and builds nothing — use code-walkthrough. Does not explain, summarize, or research something instead of producing it — use code-overview or research.

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 original short videos using the 光学搜索｜远景线索递进到细节确认 Creative DNA for MiniMax H3 or Seedance 2.0. Use when the user wants this causal, camera, motion, rhythm, or payoff structure with new subjects and surfaces.

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 original short videos using the 景别收紧｜从世界到眼神 Creative DNA for MiniMax H3 or Seedance 2.0. Use when the user wants this causal, camera, motion, rhythm, or payoff structure with new subjects and surfaces.

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 and recommend improvements for a repository's agent-readable context, including AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, WARP.md, CONTRIBUTING.md, .agents/skills, and specs/ PRODUCT.md and TECH.md contracts. Use when asked to review, score, assess, or standardize repo instructions, agent onboarding, spec workflows, or cross-repo agent-context conventions. Use agentsmd-scaffold instead when the user wants to generate or apply root/scoped AGENTS.md 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 a skill is brittle, drifting, repeatedly failing, or needs a Reliable Skill Contract. Trigger for phrases like skill lifeguard, reliable skill, self-maintaining skill, negative examples, verification checkpoints, drift signals, replay hooks, or failure log to skill patch. Audits or patches skills so high-value workflows include explicit forbidden behaviors, checkpoints, machine-checkable done conditions, replay or smoke hooks, and drift detection.

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。

Lightweight anti-hallucination workflow for task kickoff, review prioritization, and regression retrospectives. Use when the user asks for guardrails, task contracts, risk scoring, or review templates.

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。

REST/GraphQL/gRPC API design best practices. Use when designing APIs, defining contracts, handling versioning. Covers OpenAPI 3.2, GraphQL Federation, gRPC streaming.

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 designing PostgreSQL + Redis data models, indexes, caching strategies, JSONB usage, tiered storage, or cache consistency contracts.

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 designing organizational structure (team topologies, Conway's Law alignment), mapping stakeholders by power-interest for change initiatives, defining team interface contracts (APIs, SLAs, decision rights, handoffs), assessing capability maturity (DORA, CMMC, agile maturity models), planning org restructures (functional to product teams, platform teams, shared services), or when user mentions "org design", "team structure", "stakeholder map", "team interfaces", "capability maturity", "Conway's Law", or "RACI".

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 the bioengineering, mechanobiology, and lymphatic transport reasoning of J. Brandon Dixon, professor of mechanical and biomedical engineering at Georgia Institute of Technology. Reach for this skill whenever analyzing lymphatic biomechanics, active vessel contractility versus passive drainage, peristaltic fluid transport, microfluidic organ-on-a-chip design, preclinical lymphedema models, non-invasive functional imaging, targeted nanomedicine delivery, or automated disease staging. Use this skill to critique bioengineering assumptions, guide quantitative protocol design, evaluate biomechanical pump failure, and formulate interdisciplinary biomedical solutions.

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。