「verification」の検索結果

Linting and static analysis after code edits. Triggers on lint, format, check, validate, types. NOT for full build verification (mk:verify) or test coverage (mk: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。

Use when a problem requires structured step-by-step reasoning before acting. Prevents jumping to conclusions or guessing root causes without evidence. Triggers on complex debugging, multi-step analysis, hypothesis verification, or when mk:fix invokes diagnosis phase. NOT for being stuck on approach (too many implementations, forced assumptions, innovation block) — use mk:problem-solving instead.

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。

Systematically QA test a web application and fix bugs found. Runs QA testing, then iteratively fixes bugs in source code, committing each fix atomically and re-verifying. Use when asked to "qa", "QA", "test this site", "find bugs", "test and fix", or "fix what's broken". Proactively suggest when the user says a feature is ready for testing or asks "does this work?". Three tiers: Quick (critical/high only), Standard (+ medium), Exhaustive (+ cosmetic). Produces before/after health scores, fix evidence, and a ship-readiness summary.

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。

Multi-pass structural code review with adversarial analysis, scope-aware dispatch, adversarial persona passes, and forced-finding protocol. Supports input modes: branch diff (default), PR number (#123), commit hash, pending changes (--pending). Use when asked to "review this PR", "code review", "pre-landing review", "check my diff", or "review #123". Proactively suggest when the user is about to merge or land code changes. NOT for behavioral verification against a running build (see mk:evaluate); NOT for post-implementation simplification (see mk:simplify).

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。

Automatic quality control, linting, and static analysis after code modifications. Triggers on: lint, format, check, validate, types, static analysis. NOT for full build verification (see mk:verify); NOT for test coverage (see mk: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。

Chief Security Officer mode. Infrastructure-first security audit: secrets archaeology, dependency supply chain, CI/CD pipeline security, LLM/AI security, skill supply chain scanning, plus OWASP Top 10, STRIDE threat modeling, and active verification. Two modes: daily (zero-noise, 8/10 confidence gate) and comprehensive (monthly deep scan, 2/10 bar). Trend tracking across audit runs. Use when: "security audit", "threat model", "pentest review", "OWASP", "CSO 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。

Routes agent management tasks to the correct manager agent. Use when user requests agent creation, updates, audits, git operations, or verification.

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。

10-team parallel deep analysis with cross-verification for any topic, repository, or technology. Use when user invokes /research or asks for comprehensive research.

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。

Full R017 verification (5+3 rounds) before commit

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。

Template for pre-reasoning → action → post-verification model allocation

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。

Spec-Driven Development workflow — enforces sdd/ folder hierarchy with planning-first gates, current-state artifacts, and completion verification

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。

CVE triage workflow for vulnerability analysis, reproduction assessment, and patch verification

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。

Multi-angle release quality verification using parallel expert review teams

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。

Establish, author, restructure, or audit human-first processor Architecture, Design, Research, Review, and Verification documentation. Use for progressive documentation scaffolding, authority maps, reading paths, document-type content contracts, length-budgeted splitting, or maintainability reviews. Do not use as a substitute for cycle-accurate microarchitecture analysis or RTL implementation.

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。

Develop, challenge, and document Chisel processor microarchitecture designs before implementation. Use when discussing or writing design documents for processor pipelines, queues, issue logic, rename, ROB, LSU, caches, MSHRs, forwarding, wakeup, replay, flush, privilege, exceptions, or other cycle-accurate hardware mechanisms; when converting design conversations into stable Markdown specifications; or when reviewing a proposed Chisel CPU design for correctness, timing, area, verification cost, and cross-document consistency.

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。

Document-driven workflow for implementing, reviewing, and verifying Chisel processor and memory-subsystem RTL. Use when Codex must work from maintained Architecture and Design, trace a complete integration surface, reason in synthesized-hardware terms, keep source-adjacent _codex.md summaries current, avoid redundant or overprotective logic, or run focused functional verification.

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。

Turn a reference image or mockup into a working local frontend that matches it closely. Inspects the image, extracts the design system (layout, type, spacing, color, components), implements it, then screenshot-compares and iterates to close the gap. Use when the user says "image to code", "build this mockup", "code this screenshot", "make this design real", or provides a UI image to implement. Part of the Product Design set. Uses a browser tool for screenshot verification.

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。

Stop AI agents from secretly bypassing your rules. Mechanical enforcement with git hooks, secret detection, deployment verification, and import registries. Born from real production incidents: server crashes, token leaks, code rewrites. Works with Claude Code, Clawdbot, Cursor. Install once, enforce forever.

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 data validity through Openapi Trust - email deliverability, mobile number HLR checks, IP reputation, URL safety scans, document-based identity verification (IDV). Use for anti-fraud validation of user-provided contact data and identities.

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。

End-to-end smoke against the local rembric dev server (`pnpm run dev`, host Next.js dev on :3000). Apply when the user says "smoke", "probar contra docker", "dev:up", or after applying an OpenSpec change that touches HTTP (`apps/web/src/app/api/`), MCP tools (`packages/mcp/src/`), or DB migrations (`packages/db/src/migrations/`). Encodes bring-up, readiness verification, probe pattern and teardown — not the probes themselves.

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。

Patterns for vibe coding that produce production-quality output instead of garbage. Covers prompt engineering for AI coding, verification without reading every line, accept/reject/refine decision framework, architectural guardrails, context management (CLAUDE.md, .cursor/rules), TDD-driven vibe coding, screenshot-driven development, diff review discipline, and the anti-patterns that destroy quality. Activate on: "vibe coding", "AI coding quality", "Claude Code workflow", "AI-assisted development", "how to use AI for coding", "coding with AI", "agentic engineering workflow", "AI code quality", "vibe code without garbage", "production quality AI code", "CLAUDE.md setup", "cursorrules setup", "pre-commit hooks for AI", "TDD with AI", "test-driven vibe coding". NOT for: multi-person collaborative coding sessions (use cooperative-vibe-coding), building AI/LLM applications (use ai-engineer), prompt engineering for non-coding LLM use cases (use prompt-engineer).

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 face recognition systems with InsightFace, ArcFace, enrollment pipelines, HDBSCAN clustering, and privacy-compliant architecture. Activate on: face recognition, face enrollment, face clustering, identity verification, facial search. NOT for: general object detection (computer-vision-pipeline), emotion analysis (ai-engineer).

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。

Cloudflare Pages and Workers deployment checklist for wrangler deploys, secret audits, D1 migrations, Worker-compatible SDK checks, and browser-auth verification. Use when shipping Cloudflare changes to production. NOT for general CI/CD architecture, non-Cloudflare deployments, or post-launch UX QA.

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。

Quality control for pooled CRISPR screens covering library representation, Gini index, log-skew, replicate Pearson and Spearman concordance, essentialome precision-recall AUC against CEGv2 (Hart 2017), Cas9 cut-toxicity diagnostics, copy-number amplicon detection (Aguirre 2016 / Munoz 2016), bottleneck propagation through plasmid pool, infection, selection, and endpoint stages, MOI verification, and DepMap-style screen-quality scoring. Use when assessing screen quality before hit calling, deciding whether to repeat or rescue a screen, diagnosing low-confidence hits, choosing between MAGeCK / BAGEL2 / Chronos based on quality grade, picking a normalization strategy from QC signatures, or evaluating whether an in-vivo screen retained adequate library complexity.

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。