「severity」の検索結果

Audit a UI or design against WCAG 2.2 AA/AAA and ARIA patterns, returning criterion-referenced findings with severity and specific fixes. Use when the user wants an accessibility check, contrast verification, keyboard/screen-reader review, or wants to confirm a component meets POUR.

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。

Retrieves and groups GitHub code scanning alerts by rule and severity using the gh CLI

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。

Map an organisation's risks against its insurance policy portfolio to find what's uncovered, underinsured, or double-covered. Use when asked to run a coverage gap analysis, review an insurance programme against a risk register, check what risks aren't insured, or audit a policy portfolio. Produces a risk-by-coverage matrix, flagged gaps and overlaps, a deductible stack review, and recommendations ranked by expected-loss severity.

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。

Decode a counteroffer after you resign — what the raise, promotion promise, or title bump really signals, the statistics-informed risks of staying, and a clear-eyed decision framework. Use when asked my company countered my resignation, should I accept a counteroffer, they offered me more to stay, or decode this retention offer. Produces a component-by-component decode with 🔴🟡🟢 severity, the questions that expose which promises are real, and the stay/go decision sheet.

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。

Write a clear, reproducible bug report that gets fixed fast. Use when asked to write a bug report, file a defect, report an issue, or turn 'it's broken' into an actionable ticket. Produces a structured report — a precise title, steps to reproduce, expected vs. actual, environment, severity/priority, and evidence — so a developer can reproduce and fix it without a back-and-forth.

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。

EMC pre-compliance risk analysis for KiCad PCB designs — 18 check categories, 44 rule IDs covering ground planes, decoupling, I/O filtering, switching harmonics, clock routing, differential pair skew, board edge radiation, PDN impedance, return paths, crosstalk, ESD protection, shielding, and magnetic leakage from switching inductors. Produces severity-ranked risk report with pre-compliance test plan. Supports FCC Part 15, CISPR 32, CISPR 25 (automotive), MIL-STD-461G. SPICE-enhanced when available. Use when the user asks about EMC, EMI, radiated/conducted emissions, FCC compliance, CE marking, CISPR, ground plane issues, decoupling strategy, clock routing EMC, switching noise, differential pair skew, or whether their board will pass EMC testing. Also for "will this pass FCC?", "check my EMC", "is my ground plane okay?", "check my decoupling", or "generate an EMC test plan".

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。

Consolidate all SAST vulnerability results from the sast/ folder into a single final report ranked by severity and confidentiality impact. Reads all *-results.md files and produces sast/final-report.md. Run after all vulnerability detection skills complete. Use when asked to generate a final report, consolidate findings, or summarize security results.

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。

EMC pre-compliance risk analysis for KiCad PCB designs — 18 check categories, 44 rule IDs covering ground planes, decoupling, I/O filtering, switching harmonics, clock routing, differential pair skew, board edge radiation, PDN impedance, return paths, crosstalk, ESD protection, shielding, and magnetic leakage from switching inductors. Produces severity-ranked risk report with pre-compliance test plan. Supports FCC Part 15, CISPR 32, CISPR 25 (automotive), MIL-STD-461G. SPICE-enhanced when available. Use when the user asks about EMC, EMI, radiated/conducted emissions, FCC compliance, CE marking, CISPR, ground plane issues, decoupling strategy, clock routing EMC, switching noise, differential pair skew, or whether their board will pass EMC testing. Also for "will this pass FCC?", "check my EMC", "is my ground plane okay?", "check my decoupling", or "generate an EMC test plan".

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 support tickets, Slack channels, NPS scores, and usage patterns to flag accounts showing early churn indicators. Produces a weekly risk scorecard with severity tiers, root cause hypotheses, and suggested save plays per account. Designed for seed/Series A teams where the founder or a single CSM manages all accounts manually.

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。

Modernize removed or discouraged MATLAB functions and patterns. Use when the check_matlab_code MCP tool reports that a function "is not recommended", "will be removed in a future release", or "has been removed" — at any severity (info, warning, or error) — when migrating legacy code, or when replacing removed or discouraged APIs with current equivalents. Also applies to discouraged patterns Code Analyzer does not flag (containers.Map, bsxfun, str2num, eval, clear all) and to removed or discouraged functions such as trainNetwork, csvread, xlsread, datenum, guide, svmtrain, ltln2val, webmap.

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 drift detector. Diffs SPEC.md against current code and reports violations grouped by severity. Writes nothing — suggests remedies via the spec or build skills but never invokes them. Triggers when the user asks to check drift, audit the spec, verify invariants, or ask whether code still matches the spec. Phrasings: "check drift", "audit the spec", "does the code still match §V", "check invariants", "spec vs 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。

STRIDE + OWASP-based security audit with optional auto-fix. Scans code for vulnerabilities, categorizes by severity, and can iteratively fix findings using vc-autoresearch pattern.

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 full codebase review, categorize findings by severity, file GitHub issues, then fix each issue in an isolated git worktree and submit PRs. Use this skill when the user asks to audit the codebase, do a comprehensive code review, find and fix security/quality/reliability issues, or run a proactive health check across the entire repository.

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 an independent code review using the OpenAI Codex CLI in headless mode. Gets a second opinion from a different model family (the current Codex models) on recent changes, a PR, a commit, or the whole app — covering bugs, regressions, security, data consistency, UX/state bugs, performance risks, and testing gaps. Saves a severity-prioritised report to .jez/reviews/. Triggers: 'codex review', 'review with codex', 'independent code review', 'what does codex think', 'get codex to 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。

Runs a security scan on a deployed Power Pages site, fetches the latest scan report, and produces a plain-language summary. Scans the live site's public surface for vulnerabilities and surfaces issues by severity. Use when the user wants to scan, check, test, audit, or assess a published site, find vulnerabilities on production, view the latest scan report, see previous scan results, run a security audit, or asks "how safe is my live site?", "is my site vulnerable?", "audit my production site" — even if they say "find issues" or "check for problems" without mentioning "scan" or "security".

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 technical SEO findings from Ahrefs Site Audit (and similar crawlers) by SEO impact, not just severity. Use this skill when reviewing crawl results, prioritizing technical fixes, scoping a technical SEO sprint, or after running any site-wide crawl. Triggers on site audit results, technical fix list, crawl errors, technical SEO triage, prioritize technical issues, what should we fix first, broken links, redirect chains. Also triggers when a long list of crawler issues is creating decision paralysis.

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。

Manage active production incidents through detection, triage, mitigation, communication, and resolution with structured roles and decision-making. Use this skill whenever the user has an active incident, a production issue, a service outage, a security incident, or needs to plan incident response procedures. Triggers on incident response, production incident, outage, service down, site down, P0, P1, severity, downtime, on-call, incident commander, status page, postmortem prep. Also triggers when something is actively broken in production and the user is figuring out what to do.

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 security vulnerabilities, generates structured audit reports with severity ratings, and provides actionable remediation guidance for SAST, DevSecOps, and compliance.

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。

Contract review assistant analyzing agreements against playbooks. GREEN/YELLOW/RED severity. Use when reviewing vendor contracts, SaaS agreements, service agreements, or generating redline suggestions.

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。

Data breach incident response with ENISA severity scoring, notification timelines, and compliance tracking. Use for breach assessment and response.

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。

Structured legal risk assessment with 5x5 Severity x Likelihood matrix. Use for risk scoring, risk registers, escalation decisions, and risk memos.

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。

Respond to a breaking PR crisis: severity, holding statement, stakeholder messages, timeline. "draft a holding statement fast"

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。

Adversarial verification of AI-generated legal content with systematic fact-checking, source validation, and quality control. Use when a user asks to verify, fact-check, red-team, validate sources, or quality-control a legal document, briefing, compliance summary, or regulatory analysis before it is distributed to clients, stakeholders, or published. Trigger phrases include "verify", "fact-check", "red team", "red-flag", "check accuracy", "validate sources", "quality control", "is this correct", and "review for errors". Produces a structured verification report with severity-categorized errors, verified sources, unsupported claim list, missing disclaimers, and an explicit distribution-readiness assessment.

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。