2,498 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Plan, diagnose, and verify performance budgets, latency targets, load tests, capacity estimates, bottleneck analysis, caching strategy, query efficiency, queue throughput, and regression gates. Use when a feature may be slow, a system must scale, a performance regression is suspected, or release readiness depends on throughput, cost, memory, CPU, or response time.
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。
Plan and verify software releases with versioning, changelogs, release branches, feature flags, canaries, migration gates, rollback, deployment checks, and release readiness. Use when preparing a release, shipping a risky PR, coordinating app/backend/database rollout, recovering from a bad deploy, or defining release policy for a repo.
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。
Diagnose excessive Codex local SQLite diagnostic log writes with read-only evidence by default. Use when a user mentions logs_2.sqlite, logs_2.sqlite-wal, block_log_inserts, SSD/TBW wear, or explicitly asks to protect, clean up, verify, or restore Codex diagnostic logging.
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 and verify data contracts, schema changes, migrations, rollbacks, backfills, compatibility windows, tenant isolation, and API-to-database field mapping. Use when changing database schema, event payloads, persisted documents, analytics tables, multi-tenant data boundaries, or any user-visible data contract where silent fallback or undeclared fields would be dangerous.
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, audit, and verify configuration, environment separation, secrets, BYOK flows, key rotation, config schema validation, and drift checks across local, dev, staging, and production. Use when adding env vars, changing runtime config, handling API keys or user-provided keys, diagnosing config drift, or preparing deploy/release configuration.
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。
Verifies factual claims in documents using web search and official sources, then proposes corrections with user confirmation. Use when the user asks to fact-check, verify information, validate claims, check accuracy, or update outdated information in documents. Supports AI model specs, technical documentation, statistics, and general factual statements.
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 inspecting or editing Blender scenes through the official Blender Lab MCP server. Check the add-on connection, read the scene first, and verify edits.
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。
Brand-aware PowerPoint engine. Use to (1) EXTRACT a company's brand from a .pptx template into a reusable "Brand Profile", (2) COMPREHEND the template with the model (optional), (3) VERIFY it, (4) GENERATE a new on-brand .pptx from an IntermediateDocument. Trigger on "extract our brand", "use our deck template", "generate a branded deck from our profile", or when a ./brand-kit exists. For one-off slide edits with no saved brand profile, use the normal pptx skill instead. NOT for .docx (brand-docx), .xlsx (brand-xlsx), or PDFs.
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。
Brand-aware Word engine. Use to (1) EXTRACT a company's brand from a Word template into a reusable "Brand Profile", (2) COMPREHEND the template with the model (optional), (3) VERIFY it, (4) GENERATE new on-brand .docx documents FROM a saved profile. Trigger on "extract our brand", "learn/match this template", "use our brand kit", "generate a branded report from our profile", or when a ./brand-kit exists. For one-off Word edits with NO saved brand profile, use the docx skill instead. NOT for .pptx (brand-pptx), .xlsx (brand-xlsx), or PDFs.
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。
Brand-aware Excel engine. Use to (1) EXTRACT a company's brand from a .xlsx template into a reusable "Brand Profile", (2) COMPREHEND the template with the model (optional), (3) VERIFY it, (4) GENERATE a new on-brand .xlsx from a GridDocument fill manifest. Trigger on "extract our brand", "use our workbook template", "generate a branded workbook from our profile", or when a ./brand-kit exists. For one-off spreadsheet edits with no saved brand profile, use the normal xlsx skill instead. NOT for .docx (brand-docx), .pptx (brand-pptx), or PDFs.
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 web pages for accessibility issues, WCAG compliance, and screen reader compatibility. Trigger when the user asks to: check accessibility, run an a11y audit, test WCAG compliance, check screen reader support, audit ARIA attributes, verify keyboard navigation, find accessibility issues, or check for missing alt text or labels.
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。
Invoke FIRST, before creating, editing, or deleting components, stories, styles, CSS, themes, colors, or design tokens — anything that changes how the UI looks, no exceptions. Also for starting or previewing Storybook to verify UI, requests to show, browse, or list components, stories, or UI states, and docs, props, or usage lookups.
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。
Work with the QStash JavaScript/TypeScript SDK for serverless messaging, scheduling. Use when publishing messages to HTTP endpoints, creating schedules, managing queues, verifying incoming messages in serverless environments.
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。
Optimize Nostr relay queries using NDK batch fetching. Use when: (1) Checking existence of many events one-by-one is slow, (2) Loop with individual fetchEvents calls causing N+1 query problem, (3) Need to verify multiple addressable events (Kind 30000+) exist. NDK's fetchEvents accepts arrays for tag filters (#d, #p, #e, authors), enabling batch queries that reduce hundreds of round-trips to a single request.
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。
Fix test failures when adding retry/fallback logic causes mock call count mismatches. Use when: (1) Test fails with "Expected: <1>, Actual: <2>" or similar call count errors after adding retry or fallback mechanisms, (2) MissingStubError appears for methods in new fallback code paths, (3) Mockito verify().called(N) assertions fail after behavior changes. Applies to Dart/Flutter with Mockito, but pattern is universal.
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。
Debug 404 errors for API endpoints in microservice architectures where code exists but routing sends requests to wrong service. Use when: (1) API endpoint returns 404 despite code being deployed, (2) Multiple services share same hostname via HTTPRoute/Ingress, (3) Service logs show "Health server" but you expected API endpoints, (4) Monorepo deploys multiple images and endpoint might be in different service than expected. Covers: verifying which service handles which paths, HTTPRoute path precedence, testing endpoints directly from inside cluster, matching image tags across services.
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。
Fix cert-manager DNS01 ACME challenges stuck in "pending" state with "DNS record not yet propagated" inside GKE private clusters, even when TXT records exist in Cloudflare DNS. Use when: (1) cert-manager challenges show "pending" for hours with propagation check failures, (2) dig from outside cluster shows correct TXT records but cert-manager can't verify them, (3) Using Cloudflare DNS01 solver in a GKE private cluster with Cloud NAT, (4) Google Cloud intercepts 8.8.8.8 DNS queries returning NXDOMAIN for Cloudflare-managed records, (5) Even --dns01-recursive-nameservers with 1.1.1.1 doesn't fix the propagation check despite TXT records being verifiable from busybox pods in the same namespace. Covers the full debugging flow and certbot manual workaround.
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 verify codes with segmented input.
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 an openai-guardrails-python GitHub issue or pull request as a maintainer. Use to verify the claimed need and practical impact, compare supported alternatives or competing approaches, separate code quality from repository readiness, recommend the maintainer action, and draft a copy-ready comment when evidence, changes, or closure should be 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。
Generates automated test oracles to verify correct software behavior. Creates assertion-based oracles (expected values), property-based oracles (invariants), differential oracles (comparing implementations), and metamorphic oracles (input transformations). Use when you need to generate assertions for test cases, identify invariants that should always hold, compare new vs legacy implementations, create metamorphic test relationships, validate function correctness, or improve test coverage with better verification strategies. Supports Python (pytest, unittest, hypothesis) and Java (JUnit, property testing).
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 traceability matrices connecting requirements to design documents to source code implementation, tracking the complete development lifecycle. Use when you need to verify implementation completeness, ensure all requirements are implemented in code, generate compliance documentation, audit requirement coverage, identify orphaned code, or create traceability reports for stakeholders. Supports parsing requirements from Markdown, Word, and PDFs; extracting design from architecture docs and API specs; and scanning source code for implementations. Outputs to Markdown tables, Excel/CSV, and HTML visualizations.
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。
Automatically generate TLA+ specifications from source code (C/C++, Python) for formal verification of distributed systems. Use when users need to: (1) Generate TLA+ specs from program implementations, (2) Model distributed systems, consensus protocols, or concurrent algorithms, (3) Extract state variables, actions, and invariants from code, (4) Create formal specifications for model checking with TLC, (5) Verify safety and liveness properties of distributed systems. Particularly effective for message-passing systems, replication protocols, consensus algorithms, and distributed transactions.
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。
Hardware verification tool for checking functional equivalence between two RTL designs (Verilog). Use when users need to: (1) Verify if two RTL versions are functionally equivalent, (2) Compare original vs. refactored RTL code, (3) Validate design changes or optimizations, (4) Identify semantic vs. cosmetic differences, (5) Generate counterexamples for non-equivalent designs. Analyzes interface alignment, state variables, logic differences, and produces detailed equivalence verdicts with plain language explanations. Particularly effective for design verification, code reviews, and regression testing of RTL modifications.
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 behavioral consistency between high-level hardware specifications and RTL implementations. Use when asked to check RTL consistency, verify RTL against spec, check hardware specification compliance, validate RTL implementation, find spec violations in RTL, check behavioral consistency, or when working with hardware designs that need verification against protocol specifications, timing requirements, or functional specifications in Verilog, VHDL, or SystemVerilog.
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。