「checker」の検索結果

Scan documents and slides for off-brand colors, fonts, and logos. Validate against brand guidelines and suggest corrections.

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 a codebase or business process for regulatory compliance across GDPR, HIPAA, SOC2, CCPA, and PCI-DSS. Scans for PII handling, data retention, encryption, access controls, audit logging, consent management, and data transfer issues. Generates a structured compliance report with findings, gap analysis, remediation steps, and evidence requirements.

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 Use when the user asks to fact-check, verify information, validate claims, check accuracy, or update outdated information in documents.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。

Automatically repair C/C++ code violations detected by TLA+ model checking. Takes a program, TLA+ specification, and TLC counterexample trace as input, then generates minimal code modifications to eliminate the violation. Use when: (1) TLC model checker reports an invariant violation, deadlock, or temporal property failure, (2) You have a counterexample trace and need to fix the corresponding code, (3) You need to understand how a TLA+ violation maps to program-level bugs, (4) You want to validate repairs by re-running TLC. Supports safety properties (invariants), liveness properties (temporal logic), and deadlock 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。

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。

Automatically derives TLA+ properties (invariants, safety, liveness) from natural-language requirements or structured requirement documents. Resolves ambiguities, asks clarifying questions for underspecified requirements, and outputs TLA+-compatible property definitions with semantic explanations. Use when translating system requirements, specifications, or behavioral constraints into formal TLA+ temporal logic properties for verification with TLC model checker.

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。

Checks whether a new version of a repository preserves the behavior observed by tests on the old version. Use this skill when comparing two versions of code to detect regressions, verify refactoring safety, validate bug fixes don't break existing functionality, or ensure backward compatibility. Detects differences in function outputs, exceptions, observable states, and performance between versions. Generates reports highlighting potential regressions (critical, high, medium, low severity), improvements, and areas requiring verification. Triggers when users ask to check for regressions between versions, compare test behavior across versions, verify behavior preservation, or validate that changes don't break existing 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。

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。

Verify that design documents, code implementations, and tests fully cover all specified requirements. Use this skill when validating requirement traceability, conducting design reviews, assessing implementation completeness, checking test coverage against requirements, performing compliance audits, or identifying missing functionality. Produces coverage reports showing which requirements are satisfied, partially satisfied, or missing.

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 generates executable test cases from model checking counterexample traces. Translates abstract counterexample states and transitions into concrete test inputs, execution steps, and assertions that reproduce property violations. Use when working with model checker outputs (SPIN, CBMC, NuSMV, TLA+, Java PathFinder, etc.) and needing to create regression tests, validate bug fixes, or reproduce verification failures in executable test suites.

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。

Analyzes code to identify security-critical time intervals and timing vulnerabilities in authentication, authorization, and time-sensitive security operations. Use this skill when reviewing code for proper timeout enforcement, token expiration, session management, rate limiting, password reset validity, or any time-sensitive security mechanism. Detects missing expiration checks, excessive timeout values, lack of rate limiting, client-side only validation, hardcoded timeouts, and timing attack vulnerabilities. Triggers when users ask to check security timeouts, verify token expiration handling, audit session timeout implementation, review rate limiting, or analyze time-based security controls.

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。

Compare runtime behavior between original and migrated repositories to detect behavioral differences, regressions, and semantic changes. Use when validating code migrations, refactorings, language ports, framework upgrades, or any transformation that should preserve behavior. Automatically compares test results, execution traces, API responses, and observable outputs between two repository versions. Provides actionable guidance for fixing deviations and ensuring behavioral equivalence.

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。

Explain why counterexamples violate specifications by analyzing formal specifications (temporal logic, invariants, pre/postconditions, code contracts), informal requirements (user stories, acceptance criteria), test specifications (assertions, property-based tests), and providing step-by-step traces showing state changes, comparing expected vs actual behavior, identifying root causes, and assessing violation impact. Use when debugging test failures, understanding model checker output, explaining runtime assertion violations, analyzing static analysis warnings, or teaching specification concepts. Produces structured markdown explanations with traces, comparisons, state diagrams, and cause chains. Triggers when users ask why something failed, explain a violation, understand a counterexample, debug a specification, or analyze why a test fails.

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 analyzes configuration files to detect inconsistencies, conflicts, missing keys, and divergent values across environments, versions, or modules. Use when managing multi-environment configurations, detecting config drift, validating configuration changes, or ensuring consistency across microservices. Supports JSON, YAML, TOML, INI, XML, .env, and properties files. Identifies security issues like hardcoded secrets and provides actionable resolution 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。

Nuxt SEO v5 modules (robots, sitemap, og-image, schema-org, link-checker, seo-utils, site-config). Use when implementing SEO, robots.txt, sitemaps, Schema.org, or meta tags in Nuxt apps.

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 a disciplined engineering workflow to any code change. Use whenever implementing a feature, fixing a bug, or refactoring — before writing code, not after. Walks orient → baseline → smallest change → test → verify → self-review, and enforces language-agnostic hard gates (don't mass-reformat, keep the linter and type-checker clean, keep the build and tests green, make interface changes additive, protect security invariants).

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。

Think and work like an expert Database Systems Researcher. Use when a task calls for Database Systems Researcher judgment. Reasons from storage hierarchy, concurrency semantics, query-optimization theory, and declared workload models through TPC-C/H, YCSB, and JOB benchmarks, Jepsen/Elle correctness checkers, and perf/blktrace/fio profiling while treating cardinality-estimation plan regressions, tail-latency spikes under skew, unfair fsync-disabled speedups, and benchmark-trick wins as first-class failure modes.

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。

Validate API changes against an expected contract. Use when a mid-level developer needs to detect breaking changes.

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。

Tool suite status checker — shows which of the 5 AI tool suites are installed and ready

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 any domain's AI-readiness by using curl to directly probe robots.txt, llms.txt, and llms-full.txt, then scores each file against a structured checklist and delivers a formatted report with pass/warn/fail findings and actionable fixes. Use this skill whenever a user provides a domain or URL and wants to know if llms.txt or llms-full.txt is available, discoverable, or properly structured. Trigger on phrases like "check llms.txt for", "does this site have llms.txt", "find llms.txt", "check llms for this url", "audit llms.txt", "is llms-full.txt available", or any time a user shares a domain/docs URL and wants AI-readiness checked. Also trigger when the user wants to verify GEO/AEO readiness of a documentation site.

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 product and brand names for conflicts across trademarks, domains, social handles, and package registries. Returns a risk level and Proceed/Modify/Abandon verdict. Don't use for name brainstorming, logo design, or trademark filings.

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 iOS/macOS apps against App Store Review Guidelines before submission, with evidence-backed verdicts and fixes. Don't use for Google Play, general code review, or rejection appeals.

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。

Analyze and optimize X (Twitter) posts for viral potential and reach using heuristics inspired by X's published open-source recommendation architecture. Use when user wants to: (1) Check if a post will go viral, (2) Score a tweet for engagement potential, (3) Optimize or rewrite a tweet for algorithmic reach, (4) Understand why a tweet underperformed, (5) Build audience in a specific niche. Triggers: "Check if this will go viral", "Make this post buzz", "Will this tweet perform well?", "Optimize my tweet", "How can I make this viral?", "rewrite this tweet", "improve my tweet engagement", "twitter algorithm", "tweet reach", "debug underperforming tweet", "バズるかチェックして", "Xでバズる投稿にして", "伸びるかチェックして", "この投稿を伸ばして", "投稿を改善して", "ツイートを最適化して"

Check an educational practice or task for cultural bias, WEIRD assumptions, and cross-cultural validity. Use when adapting resources for diverse contexts or questioning universal 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。