「validation」の検索結果

Internal downstream skill for ctf-sandbox-orchestrator. CTF-sandbox workflow for JWT, JWS, and JWE validation paths, header parsing, key selection, claim acceptance, audience and issuer checks, role derivation, and token-to-identity confusion bugs. Use when the user asks to inspect JWT headers or claims, key lookup, `kid` handling, `alg` confusion, audience or issuer validation, role claims, or explain how a token becomes accepted identity or privilege. Use only after `$ctf-sandbox-orchestrator` has already established sandbox assumptions and routed here.

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。

Python error handling patterns including input validation, exception hierarchies, and partial failure handling. Use when implementing validation logic, designing exception strategies, handling batch processing failures, or building robust APIs.

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。

Implement data quality validation with Great Expectations, dbt tests, and data contracts. Use when building data quality pipelines, implementing validation rules, or establishing data contracts.

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 the implementation source code of MCP (Model Context Protocol) servers, clients, and tool handlers against a security baseline — authentication, sessions, rate limiting, input-schema validation, official-SDK usage, RCE vectors, and the OWASP MCP Top 10 — producing a report with file/line evidence. Use this skill when: - Reviewing an MCP server implementation for security before release - Checking a server against the baseline controls (MCP-01 to MCP-05) and the OWASP MCP Top 10 - Auditing tools for RCE vectors (command/code injection, unsafe deserialization, path traversal, SSTI, dependency hijacking, SSRF) - Verifying auth, session, rate-limiting, and input-validation controls on a network-exposed server - Reviewing MCP client code that handles untrusted server responses and session IDs - Requests like "review this MCP server for security" or "is my MCP server implementation secure?"

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 comprehensive preflight validation of Bicep deployments to Azure, including template syntax validation, what-if analysis, and permission checks. Use this skill before any deployment to Azure to preview changes, identify potential issues, and ensure the deployment will succeed. Activate when users mention deploying to Azure, validating Bicep files, checking deployment permissions, previewing infrastructure changes, running what-if, or preparing for azd provision.

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。

Detects prompt injection using regex signature matching, heuristic scoring for structural anomalies, and DeBERTa-based transformer classification, flagging direct injections (system-prompt overrides, role-play escapes) and indirect injections (encoded payloads, obfuscation) per OWASP LLM Top 10 (LLM01:2025). Use for input validation layers in chatbots/agents/RAG pipelines, or for retrospectively classifying injection attempts in logs or incident investigations.

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 structured data from LLM responses with Pydantic validation, retry failed extractions automatically, parse complex JSON with type safety, and stream partial results with Instructor - battle-tested structured output library

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。

Create, update, validate, or reorganize repo-local Agent Skills under .agents/skills, including SKILL.md frontmatter, first-level references, compatibility symlinks, and validation scripts. Use only for skill-tree maintenance, skill taxonomy changes, or agent-guidance validation 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。

Extract structured data from LLM responses with Pydantic validation, retry failed extractions automatically, parse complex JSON with type safety, and stream partial results with Instructor - battle-tested structured output library

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 Codex is already in the validation phase of a security scan or the user explicitly asks to determine whether one or more candidate security findings are valid. Do not use as the primary trigger for full PR, commit, branch, patch, or repository scans.

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。

Patches past the barriers that stop a fuzzer making progress — checksum and hash verification, magic-value validation, time-based seeds, and other non-deterministic global state. Covers locating the blocking check, neutering it behind a fuzzing build flag, and avoiding the false positives a patch can introduce. Use when a fuzzer is stuck at validation, when coverage shows large regions behind a checksum, or when valid inputs are impractical to generate.

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。

Validates security patches with reproducible baseline-versus-patched evidence, including original exploits, root-cause variants, behavior preservation, regressions, and newly introduced security failures. Use after a patch exists and before accepting, merging, or reporting it as fixed; also use when an AI-generated patch, remediation commit, pull request, or proposed upstream fix needs adversarial post-patch validation across any language.

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。

WPA/WPA2/WPA3-Enterprise (802.1X / EAP) attack methodology — EAP method identification (PEAP-MSCHAPv2, EAP-TTLS, EAP-TLS, EAP-GTC, EAP-PWD, EAP-FAST), evil-twin RADIUS attacks with eaphammer for credential capture, MSCHAPv2 challenge-response cracking, EAP-TLS client certificate theft paths (DPAPI, NDES, AD CS auto-enrollment), supplicant validation bypass (missing server cert validation, missing CN pinning, BYOD misconfigurations), and post-capture pivots into AD via cracked domain credentials. Use for corporate Wi-Fi engagements where the network is 802.1X authenticated.

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 Codex is already in the validation phase of a security scan or the user explicitly asks to determine whether one or more candidate security findings are valid. Do not use as the primary trigger for full PR, commit, branch, patch, or repository scans.

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 authoring rig specs, agent specs, workflow specs, startup/context fragments, operating-mode declarations, or designing the user spec library. Covers the 4 failure modes (spec instantiates topology but not workflow/mode; spec depends on local paths and fails on another host; agents modify specs as one-off files instead of preserving reusable intent; validation proves YAML shape but not whether topology can run) and the validation-vs-runtime-realization distinction.

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。

Expert Mermaid diagram creation, validation, and rendering with dual-engine output (SVG/PNG/ASCII). Supports all 20+ diagram types including C4 architecture, AWS architecture-beta with service icons, flowcharts, sequence, ERD, state, class, mindmap, timeline, git graph, sankey, and more. Features code-to-diagram analysis, batch rendering, 15+ themes, and syntax validation. Use when users ask to create diagrams, visualize architecture, render mermaid files, generate ASCII diagrams, document system flows, model databases, draw AWS infrastructure, analyze code structure, or anything involving "mermaid", "diagram", "flowchart", "architecture diagram", "sequence diagram", "ERD", "C4", "ASCII diagram". Do NOT use for non-Mermaid image generation, data plotting with chart libraries, or general documentation writing.

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。

Register AI agents on-chain using the ERC-8004 Trustless Agents standard. Manage agent identity as NFTs, build reputation through feedback, and request third-party validation.

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 only when a developer explicitly asks to clean, prune, tidy, or organize DeepChat SDD documentation after implementation and validation. Scans docs/features, docs/issues, and docs/architecture; prefers multi-agent review when available; removes completed issue docs when a linked GitHub issue is closed or implementation and validation evidence proves the bug no longer exists, drops stale plans and legacy task files from completed feature or architecture goals, and deletes obsolete feature or architecture docs.

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。

Formik form handling with validation patterns. Use when building forms, implementing validation, or handling form submission.

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。

Guides creation and validation of custom dotnet new templates from existing projects. Generates a .template.config/template.json that preserves the source project's conventions. USE FOR: creating a reusable dotnet new template from an existing project, bootstrapping .template.config/template.json with correct identity, shortName, parameters, and post-actions, adding parameters or conditional content to a template you are authoring, validating the template.json you are authoring before publishing, packaging templates as NuGet packages for distribution. DO NOT USE FOR: validating an existing template.json as a standalone task (use template-validation), finding or using existing templates (use template-discovery and template-instantiation), MSBuild project file issues unrelated to template authoring, NuGet package publishing (only template packaging structure).

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。

Build forms, validate data, and react to user input in Blazor. USE FOR adding forms, search boxes, filter panels, inline editing, data-entry UI, file uploads, validation (annotations or custom), handling form submissions, and binding input controls. Covers EditForm, built-in input components, DataAnnotationsValidator, custom validation, SSR form patterns (SupplyParameterFromForm, FormName, AntiforgeryToken, Enhance), and @bind for simple interactive controls. DO NOT USE for project scaffolding (see create-blazor-project) or prerendering issues (see support-prerendering).

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。

Defensive CI/CD patterns: semver validation, token checks, retry logic, draft detection — earned from v0.8.22

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。

Internal gh-aw architecture: validation system design, safe output message patterns, schema validation, YAML compatibility notes, and MCP logs guardrail.

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。

Finding validation before writing any report — 7-Question Gate (all 7 questions), 4 pre-submission gates, always-rejected list, conditionally valid with chain table, CVSS 3.1 quick reference, severity decision guide, report title formula, 60-second pre-submit checklist. Use BEFORE writing any report. One wrong answer = kill the finding and move on. Saves N/A ratio.

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。