「engineer」の検索結果

Classify CI failures — distinguish clear regressions from infra flakes and security-test failures. Produces structured failure reports.

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 recent merges to main (and noteworthy direct commits) since a given window (last tag or date in state). Extract titles, labels, types, linked issues, and signals for breaking changes or security. Produces structured input for a release notes drafter. Use in changelog-drafter loops.

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Scan package manifests and lockfiles for outdated and vulnerable dependencies. Classify by severity and update type.

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。

Takes a structured list of changes from changelog-scan and produces a clean, categorized, user-facing release notes draft. Follows project voice and conventions. Never publishes — only proposes a draft file or section.

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。

Watch open PRs, check CI status, review staleness, merge conflicts, and unanswered review comments. Produces a prioritized watchlist.

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。

Triage open pull requests for CI status, review comments, and merge readiness. Use in PR babysitter loops. Respects project review norms and required 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。

Scan recent merges to main for follow-up cleanup: TODOs, deprecations, broken doc links, stale flags. Use in post-merge cleanup loops.

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。

Triage recent changes, CI failures, issues, and conversations. Produces a concise, actionable findings report suitable for a loop to consume. Writes structured output to a state file or issue tracker.

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。

Check token budget and run-log spend before and after a loop run. Enforces early exit when over budget or when there is no actionable work.

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。

可靠工程工作流的执行细则——探索→计划→TDD→系统化调试→代码审查→完成前验证。供方法论教练在开发任务中逐步引导。

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。

奶油纸 + 锈红 + 蓝图网格 mask + 黑边硬卡片 + pipeline 盒

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。

GitHub-dark + JetBrains Mono + 终端代码块, 含 agenda + Q&A

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。

Extract a comprehensive design system (DESIGN.md) directly from frontend source code — React, Vue, Svelte, Angular, plain HTML/CSS, or any web framework. Analyzes component files, stylesheets, Tailwind configs, theme definitions, and design tokens to produce a rich, Stitch-compatible design system document. Use this skill whenever the user wants to reverse-engineer a design system from an existing codebase, audit the visual language of a project, extract design tokens from source files, or understand the styling patterns in a frontend repo — even if they just say "what does this app look like?" or "pull out the design from this 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。

面向电商设计师、海报美工、品牌视觉、UI设计师、信息图编辑、商业摄影师、内容创作者等需要高质量可控出图的角色，在需要用 GPT-Image-2 生成电商主图、电影海报、信息图、品牌视觉、UI截图、古籍国风、角色IP等场景时，通过「Prompt as Code」原子化Schema+20+工业JSON模板+四步工作流，产出结构化、可复用、可批量的生图提示词，再调用 image_generation 出图。不适用于随意生图或简单风景照。

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。

Mod a PC game the user owns, taking an idea to working in the real game and recorded. It covers new items, weapons, enemies, bosses, units, civilizations, mechanics, art, sound, VR and cross-game mashups. Use when the user wants to mod, extend, hack on, reverse engineer or mash up a game ("add a nuke to Terraria", "make a new civ for Age of Empires", "put Minecraft inside X", "can I mod this game?"). It covers recon (engine, loaders, anti-cheat), choosing the route, a safe lab, a first vertical slice, fal-generated assets, in-game verification and a showcase clip.

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。

Triage a batch of raw security findings. Verify each is real, collapse duplicates, re-rank by derived exploitability, and tag with an owner. Takes a directory or file of scanner output and writes TRIAGE.json + TRIAGE.md sorted by what actually needs engineering attention. Use when asked to "triage findings", "validate scanner output", "prioritize vulns", or "review the backlog". Runs interactively by default; pass --auto to skip the interview.

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。

Phishing campaign execution methodology for authorized red team engagements. Covers end-to-end campaign lifecycle: infrastructure provisioning (GoPhish, SMTP relay configuration, domain acquisition and aging, SPF/DKIM/DMARC alignment), payload delivery vectors (Office macro weaponization, HTA droppers, ISO/IMG container abuse, LNK shortcut hijacking, OneNote embedded payloads, HTML smuggling), email authentication bypass techniques (SPF softfail exploitation, DKIM replay attacks, display name spoofing, homoglyph and cousin domain registration), credential harvesting with MFA bypass (EvilGinx2 transparent proxy, Modlishka session relay, pixel-perfect HTML cloning), spear phishing pretext development informed by OSINT, email security gateway evasion, QR code phishing (quishing), and callback phishing for initial access. Integrates with GoPhish for campaign management, EvilGinx2 for adversary-in-the-middle credential interception, King Phisher for template design, and the Social Engineering Toolkit for payload generation. Maps to MITRE ATT&CK T1566 (Phishing) and sub-techniques T1566.001 (Spearphishing Attachment), T1566.002 (Spearphishing Link), T1566.003 (Spearphishing via Service). Assumes you have written authorization and a defined scope before any campaign execution.

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。

Comprehensive offensive methodology for software supply chain attacks covering the full kill chain from reconnaissance through exploitation. Addresses dependency confusion across npm, PyPI, and NuGet ecosystems where internal registry override allows an attacker to inject malicious packages that shadow private dependencies. Covers typosquatting techniques for popular packages, compromised package injection via maintainer account takeover or social engineering, and build system attacks through Makefile injection, setup.py install hooks, and npm postinstall scripts. Extends into CI/CD artifact tampering where build outputs are replaced or modified in transit, code signing abuse through stolen or self-signed certificates, upstream repository compromise via commit injection or force-push to trusted repos, and container image supply chain attacks including base image trojaning and registry confusion. Maps to MITRE ATT&CK T1195.001 (Supply Chain Compromise: Compromise Software Dependencies and Development Tools) and T1195.002 (Supply Chain Compromise: Compromise Software Supply Chain). Integrates tooling such as confused for dependency confusion scanning and dependency-check for known vulnerable component detection. Each technique section provides reproducible proof-of-concept patterns, detection guidance for defenders, and engagement-safe execution notes for authorized red team operations.

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 a 1-2 page executive summary for a feature — orients sales, leadership, and engineering from a single document.

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。

Multi-perspective review of a feature plan or requirements doc before development begins. Evaluates from strategy, design/UX, and engineering angles to catch gaps early.

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。

Evaluate a local Codex plugin in engineer-friendly language. Use when the user says "evaluate this plugin", "audit this plugin", "why did this score that way", "what should I fix first", "help me benchmark this plugin", or asks for a plugin-wide report before comparing versions.

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。

Help engineers evaluate a local skill or plugin, explain why it scored that way, show what to fix first, measure real token usage, benchmark starter scenarios, or decide what to run next. Use when the user says things like "evaluate this skill", "give me an analysis of the game dev skill", "why did this score that way", "what should I fix first", "measure the real token usage of this skill", or "what should I run next?".

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。

Evaluate a local Codex skill in engineer-friendly terms. Use when the user says "evaluate this skill", "give me an analysis of the game dev skill", "audit this skill", "why did this score that way", "what should I fix first", or asks for a skill-specific report before benchmarking 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。