「case」の検索結果

Test API endpoints for correctness, edge cases, auth handling, and OpenAPI contract 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。

GStack engineering-manager plan review for architecture, data flow, APIs, migrations, edge cases, tests, performance, release risk, and implementation boundaries.

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。

The case-law chronicle of this repo's major failures — symptom, root cause, evidence, status, and the rule each battle minted — so nobody re-fights a settled battle or re-proposes a rejected fix. Use when a bug/incident looks familiar ("didn't this happen before?"), when you're about to propose an approach that may have been tried and rejected (e.g. shipping a migration from a package), when someone asks "why does rule X exist" / "why is done-by-lgtm a thing" / "what was incident 988", or when a bug-archaeology run hits the shallow-clone wall and needs the pre-June-2026 history. Trigger phrases: "has this broken before", "why can't packages ship migrations", "why did graduation fail", "why is the green-build lesson a rule", "what did we learn from incident NN". (For a live "build is green but the app is broken" symptom, start at crouton-diagnostics-index. NB keep this description free of any space-then-hash sequence — an unquoted YAML scalar treats space-hash as a comment start and silently truncates.)

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。

How to actually run every kind of test in nuxt-crouton (unit/e2e/typecheck/lint, verified commands) plus the HONEST coverage picture — which packages have real tests vs zero, the dormant skipped/todo cases behind three mocking walls, and what CI truly gates vs what CLAUDE.md claims. Use when asked "how do I run the tests", "is X covered by tests", "what does CI actually check", "why is this suite skipped", "where do I add a test", or before trusting a green build as evidence that something works.

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 the user asks for QA analysis, test planning, test cases, or root-cause analysis of a defect. Also use for post-merge PR review analysis: auditing recent closed PRs for Devin/GitHub/security bot comments, verifying whether requested corrections were applied, and turning pending fixes into SPECs.

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 single-thesis narrative newsletter essay from Ahmad's OpenMark saves. Use when Ahmad wants a thoughtful long-form piece with one clear argument, not a roundup or news recap. Trigger phrases include "essay", "long-form", "think piece", "thoughtful post", "argue that", "make a case for", "/newsletter-essay". Output is one strong thesis sentence + 3–5 narrative sections + closing call-to-think, no tables, no bullets unless necessary.

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 the user wants to design, redesign, shape, critique, audit, polish, clarify, distill, harden, optimize, adapt, animate, colorize, extract, or otherwise improve a frontend interface. Covers websites, landing pages, dashboards, product UI, app shells, components, forms, settings, onboarding, and empty states. Handles UX review, visual hierarchy, information architecture, cognitive load, accessibility, performance, responsive behavior, theming, anti-patterns, typography, fonts, spacing, layout, alignment, color, motion, micro-interactions, UX copy, error states, edge cases, i18n, and reusable design systems or tokens. Also use for bland designs that need to become bolder or more delightful, loud designs that should become quieter, live browser iteration on UI elements, or ambitious visual effects that should feel technically extraordinary. Not for backend-only or non-UI tasks.

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。

Prove a Convex feature works — seed, drive as multiple mocked users via convex-test, assert behavior including the negative authz cases (wrong user refused, data-scope enforced).

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。

Prove a Convex feature works — seed, drive as multiple mocked users via convex-test, assert behavior including the negative authz cases (wrong user refused, data-scope enforced).

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 product engineer's post-implementation testing notes for how thoroughly they cover the card's requirements and risk, and whether regression-worthy cases are automated at the right level of the test hierarchy

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。

Start a working doc — a drafting space where spec-level and implementation thinking co-exist before splitting into specs, plan, and test cases

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。

Split a working doc into the card's specs, plan, and test cases once its shape is clear

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。

Constant-product AMM bonding curve math for Pump token pricing — buy/sell quoting, fee-aware calculations, market cap computation, tiered fees, ceiling division, virtual vs real reserves, and edge-case handling.

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。

Add a new component showcase, block, or template preview page and register it everywhere it must appear (navigation, command palette, route lists, SEO, source view). Use when adding anything under /components, /blocks, or /templates.

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。

Redesign GitHub README homepages or create project-native pure SVG, hybrid SVG-composed PNG/WebP, and opt-in animated GIF assets. Use when a user asks to beautify, redesign, rebrand, visually upgrade, simplify, or audit a GitHub README; create only a hero, section headers, diagrams, badges, motion graphics, showcase modules, or other README assets; or turn a repository homepage into a cohesive visual story. If whole-README work versus asset-only work is unclear, ask which scope the user wants. For hero-like assets where pure SVG and generated raster material are both viable, explain the tradeoffs and confirm the implementation before creating the asset.

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。

Test or debug application use cases through their public Action API, including persistence, authorization failures, atomic rollback, and post-commit reactions. Use when adding regression tests for business operations.

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 or change structured input for application use cases, including extracting HTTP request data for Actions invoked from controllers, jobs, or commands. Avoid DTOs for trivial scalar 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。

Review a product requirement, PRD, brief, or meeting note before design or development; expose missing decisions, contradictions, edge cases, dependencies, and validation gaps without inventing business rules.

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。

Track vendor support tickets and RMA cases across multiple vendors. Use when managing support ticket lifecycle, updating ticket status from vendor emails, generating status reports, or identifying tickets needing follow-up.

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 a learner has surface understanding and needs to explore mechanism, tradeoffs, edge cases, and production implications at depth.

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。

Author and submit a Narrative workflow from a natural-language intent. Picks the closest example from `assets/examples/`, adapts it to the user's case, walks the YAML against the spec, resolves the data plane, and submits via `narrative_workflows_create` only after the user has approved the rendered spec. Use when: "create a workflow that does X", "schedule a daily refresh of dataset Y", "wrap this NQL as a workflow", "build a pipeline that creates view A then refreshes view B", "submit this workflow YAML", "productionize this query as a recurring job". (narrative-common)

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。

타입·상태별로 반복되는 switch/if-else 분기를 다형성(인터페이스 + 구현 클래스)으로 치환. "switch를 다형성으로", "타입 분기를 클래스로", "strategy 패턴", "/replace-conditional-with-poly" 요청 시 사용. 단, null 분기만이면 /introduce-special-case, 조건식 가독성만이면 /decompose-conditional이 적합. /replace-conditional-with-poly [commit-ref]로 호출.

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。

암묵적 가정(null 아님·범위·상태)을 Assert/Validate로 명시하여 가정 위반 시 즉시 발견. "assertion 추가", "전제 조건 명시", "가정을 코드로", "/introduce-assertion" 요청 시 사용. 단, 반복되는 null 검사를 객체로 대체하는 것은 /introduce-special-case가 적합. /introduce-assertion [commit-ref]로 호출.

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。

Knowledge base from NIST SP 800-160 Vol 1 (Engineering Trustworthy Secure Systems) and Vol 2 (Developing Cyber-Resilient Systems). Use for systems security engineering (SSE): the three SSE framework contexts (problem/solution/trustworthiness), the 30+ design principles for trustworthy secure design, trustworthiness and assurance/assurance cases, security across the ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288 life-cycle process groups, and the Vol 2 cyber-resiliency engineering framework — 4 goals (anticipate/withstand/recover/adapt), objectives, 14 techniques, implementation approaches, and design principles for the APT/adverse-conditions threat model. Bridges systems engineering and the NIST security cluster (CSF/SSDF/RMF). Does not reproduce ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288 process text, nor cover SP 800-53 control catalogs in depth.

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。