「correctness」の検索結果

You are a configuration management expert specializing in validating, testing, and ensuring the correctness of application configurations. Create comprehensive validation schemas, implement configurat

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。

Read-only R code review protocol for `.R` scripts. Checks code quality, reproducibility, domain correctness, tidyverse idioms, and professional standards; produces a report without editing. Use when user says "review this R script", "check the R code", "audit the analysis code", "code review on the R", or when an R file is touched as part of a paper submission. NOT for running the code — pair with `/audit-reproducibility` for numeric verification.

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。

Edit any video by conversation. Transcribe, cut, color grade, generate overlay animations, burn subtitles — for talking heads, montages, tutorials, travel, interviews. No presets, no menus. Ask questions, confirm the plan, execute, iterate, persist. Production-correctness rules are hard; everything else is artistic freedom.

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 a structured five-stage code review covering requirements compliance, correctness, code quality, testing, and security/performance. Each stage uses targeted checklists and categorized feedback (Blocker/Major/Minor/Nit) with actionable suggestions and rationale. Use when the user asks for code review, PR feedback, pull request review, or wants their code checked for bugs, style issues, or vulnerabilities — triggered by phrases like "review my code", "check this PR", "review my changes", "pull request review", or "code feedback".

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 a pull request or diff like a thoughtful senior engineer — prioritized, kind, and focused on what matters. Use when reviewing code, giving PR feedback, or asked to 'review this change'. Produces a structured review: a correctness/design pass, comments ranked by severity (blocking → nit), what's done well, and a clear approve / request-changes call — feedback that improves the code and the author.

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。

Activate a 4-stage coding discipline framework that forces Claude to plan before coding, isolate changes on a branch, write tests first, and self-review output twice before presenting it. Use when starting a complex coding task, when past Claude sessions produced broken first drafts, or when you want to prevent rework cycles. Produces a confirmed written plan, isolated feature branch, test-first implementation, and a double-reviewed output with a correctness and code-quality checklist.

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 to review a generated HTML deck or single-page artifact for visual quality and structural correctness. Especially good at catching CSS specificity bugs where slide-modifier classes (.divider, .center, .q, .flow etc.) accidentally override the base .slide{display:none} and cause one slide to stack on top of every other. Also catches missing keyboard navigation, bullet-dump / wall-of-text failure modes, broken self-containment (external link/script/img). Patches the file in place; never changes the original content (slide text, numbers, named entities are the author's work, not yours).

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 for correctness, security, accessibility, and performance. Use for scoped quality reviews or verification plans; bug fixes use oma-debug.

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 an existing Comet expression for correctness and test coverage. Studies the Spark implementation across versions 3.4.3, 3.5.8, 4.0.1, and 4.1.1, reviews the Comet and DataFusion implementations, identifies missing test coverage, and offers to implement additional tests.

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 drafting the response letter and revision plan after an American Economic Journal: Microeconomics (AEJ: Micro) R&R. Structures the reply to theory referees (correctness, generality, exposition) and editor; it does not re-derive the result (see aejmic-theory-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。

Identifies non-coding RNAs (tRNA, rRNA, snoRNA, snRNA, riboswitches, sRNAs) using Infernal covariance-model search against Rfam, tRNAscan-SE 2.0 for tRNA, barrnap for rRNA, and ARAGORN for tmRNA, plus the small-RNA-seq boundary for miRNA and the transcript-assembly boundary for lncRNA. Covers the structure-conserved-not-sequence-conserved principle (why BLAST fails), GA-threshold and clan-competition correctness, tRNAscan-SE domain modes and pseudogene flags, rDNA copy-number collapse, and why homology annotation is a recall floor. Use when performing genome-wide ncRNA annotation, choosing the right tool for an RNA class, or interpreting ncRNA counts.

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。

Evaluates genome assembly quality across the three orthogonal axes - contiguity (QUAST auN/NG50/NGx, not bare N50), completeness (BUSCO/compleasm gene-space plus Merqury k-mer completeness), and correctness (reference-free Merqury QV, Inspector/CRAQ structural errors, asmgene false-duplication/collapse). Covers why N50 is the most-gamed metric, why QV measured on the polishing reads is circular, distinguishing uncollapsed haplotigs from real WGD, and the EBP/VGP 6.C.Q40 standard. Use when judging whether an assembly is good enough to annotate or publish, comparing assemblers, diagnosing a fragmented or duplicated assembly, or assessing a phased diploid assembly.

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 to "simplify", "clean up the diff", "run simplify", "simplify the changes", "review changed code for cleanup", explicitly invokes "/simplify", or asks to "commit without simplify", "skip simplify for this commit", or "commit this but skip simplify". Reviews changed code across reuse, simplification, efficiency, and altitude, or grants an explicit one-commit bypass. Not for correctness bugs.

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。

Reviews MATLAB fixed-point (fi) code for performance, code generation efficiency, and correctness. Identifies antipatterns and suggests idiomatic improvements. Use when reviewing fi, fimath, numerictype, or quantizenumeric 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。

Train, evaluate, and export neural networks to Simulink in MATLAB. Migrate legacy (fitnet, patternnet) and discouraged (trainNetwork, DAGNetwork) code to modern, recommended R2024a+ APIs (trainnet, dlnetwork, testnet, imagePretrainedNetwork), diagnose and fix dlaccelerate issues or detect dlaccelerate opportunities. Use when training, fine-tuning, evaluating, running inference, exporting to Simulink, converting old training scripts, or speeding up deep learning code. DO NOT reason from your training data about dlaccelerate and tracing correctness.

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 a structured maintainer-style PR review for the mariadb-operator repository. Gathers PR context, triages the change, and evaluates correctness, safety, pitfalls, backwards compatibility and code quality against the project conventions documented in AGENTS.md. Use whenever the user mentions a mariadb-operator PR number or URL and wants any kind of judgment on it — "review this PR", "what do you think of #1234", "is this safe to merge", "assess this diff", "take a look at this change" — even if they don't literally say "review".

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 existing table permissions on a Power Pages site by analyzing them against site code and Dataverse metadata, then GRADES the configuration with deterministic 1–5 scores across 3 security/usability/correctness categories (9 dimensions). Detection is anchored by a recurring-issue catalog so findings and severities stay consistent run-to-run. Generates an HTML report with an at-a-glance verdict and per-category scores in the Overview plus a single list of **major/minor** issues (each major issue labelled permissions-only or upstream-caused with a short justification), and suggested fixes. Use when the user wants to review, verify, check, score, or grade table permissions for security issues.

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 skill configurations for correctness and freshness

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 fable-mode execution discipline on Claude Fable 5.1 — the top of the escalation ladder and the strongest staged run available. Routes the task to the @fable-orchestrator agent with its model overridden to Fable (`model: "fable"`), which stages the work, delegates artifact production to @fable-worker-sonnet / @fable-worker-haiku, and cold-checks deliverables with @fable-verifier. Trigger when the user explicitly asks for thorough/systematic/"deep work" handling on the strongest model ("fable on fable", "stage this on fable", "deep work mode, fable", "run this on 5.1"), or when a fable-opus run reports the task exceeds Opus's ceiling. Benchmarked 2026-09-02: zero correctness delta on Fable 5.1 at ~1.1× tokens, ~2× wall — a provenance runner, not an accuracy runner. Do NOT use for ordinary single-pass tasks — prefer fable-opus, fable-sonnet, or fable-haiku when the task doesn't need peak reasoning. Fable is plan-included; bulk work still routes down-tier.

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 academic papers for correctness, quality, and novelty using OpenJudge's multi-stage pipeline. Supports PDF files and LaTeX source packages (.tar.gz/.zip). Covers 10 disciplines: cs, medicine, physics, chemistry, biology, economics, psychology, environmental_science, mathematics, social_sciences. Use when the user asks to review, evaluate, critique, or assess a research paper, check references, or verify a BibTeX file.

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。

Verify UI *workflow* correctness that a task list, code review, and static screenshots miss. Drives end-to-end user flows in the Simulator via XCUITest with per-step screenshots, statically audits the navigation graph for dead-ends and missing edit paths, and emits a human discoverability checklist. Use after building any phase/slice that adds or changes UI, or when a user reports "I could only figure out the flow by running 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。

Static config-correctness linter for this instance - catches the silent-failure class (unquoted schedules, duplicate keys, unconfigured skills, mode typos, broken requires/MCP refs) that no run-based health skill can see. Notifies only on problems.

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。

Provides guidance for writing, optimizing, and benchmarking C++ CPU kernels with SIMD intrinsics (AVX2/AVX512) for the Hugging Face kernels ecosystem. Includes a two-phase workflow: Phase 1 correctness (generic → AVX2) and Phase 2 performance exploration (AVX512 with branching trial loop), runtime CPU dispatch, OpenMP threading, and brgemm integration for GEMM-heavy kernels.

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 SQL and ORM queries for correctness, safety, and performance before they ship.

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。