「check」の検索結果

Generate a prioritised compliance checklist for GDPR, SOC 2, ISO 27001, FCA, HIPAA, or other frameworks with a gap analysis. Use when asked for a compliance checklist, gap analysis, readiness assessment, or audit preparation for any regulatory framework. Produces a structured checklist with prioritised gaps, quick wins, and evidence requirements. Optimised for Opus 4.7 and newer models. Not a substitute for legal or compliance professional advice.

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。

Test website responsiveness across viewport widths using browser automation. Resizes a single session through breakpoints, screenshots each width, and detects layout transitions (column changes, nav switches, overflow). Produces comparison reports showing exactly where layouts break. Trigger with 'responsiveness check', 'check responsive', 'breakpoint test', 'viewport test', 'responsive sweep', 'check breakpoints', or 'test at mobile'.

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 guided, end-to-end security review of a Power Pages site and consolidates every finding into one HTML report covering source code and dependencies, the live site, browser headers, firewall, authentication, and role-based permissions. Use when the user wants a full security review, a release-readiness check before publishing, a code-and-config check during development, live site monitoring, or asks open-ended questions like "review my site security", "is my site safe to ship", "do a security check", "monitor my site" — even if they do not name the individual checks.

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。

Design review and validation workflow for KiCAD projects via MCP tools. Triggers on: "review my design", "check for errors", "audit", "DRC", "ERC", "find problems", "design review", "is this ready", "validate", "check my schematic", "check my PCB", "what's wrong", "run checks", "pre-fab 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。

Check and compare software component versions on SageMaker HyperPod cluster nodes - NVIDIA drivers, CUDA toolkit, cuDNN, NCCL, EFA, AWS OFI NCCL, GDRCopy, MPI, Neuron SDK (Trainium/Inferentia), Python, and PyTorch. Use when checking component versions, verifying CUDA/driver compatibility, detecting version mismatches across nodes, planning upgrades, documenting cluster configuration, or troubleshooting version-related issues on HyperPod. Triggers on requests about versions, compatibility, component checks, or upgrade planning for HyperPod clusters.

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。

Builds compliance checklists for business scenarios involving GDPR, PIPL, or advertising/data laws. Outputs a structured checklist with check items, legal basis, risk levels, and actionable recommendations. Triggered by requests like "run a compliance check," "GDPR/PIPL compliance," "pre-launch review," "privacy impact assessment (PIA/DPIA)," or asking if a feature is compliant.

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。

No Inference / Source-Locked Verification. Forces Claude to answer ONLY from user-provided materials and/or online sources actually accessed — no inference, no assumptions, no gap-filling. Every factual, legal, numerical, or procedural claim must be anchored to a cited source. Use whenever Claude reviews documents, summarises evidence, checks accuracy, drafts submissions, creates timelines, extracts facts, checks citations, analyses rules, prepares legal arguments, compares documents, verifies claims, produces chronologies, works from uploaded materials, performs legal research, checks case status, or does anything where evidential fidelity matters. Also trigger on: 'source-locked', 'no inference', 'only from the materials', 'don't assume', 'stick to the evidence', 'verify this', 'check this is right', 'work from the documents'. Overrides Claude's default tendency to fill gaps. If evidential accuracy matters, use this skill.

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。

Design a checking-for-understanding protocol with specific techniques for each lesson stage. Use when planning systematic comprehension checks during explicit or direct instruction.

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。

Best-practices reference for preparing and instrumenting applications on Temps. Covers the app runtime contract (`.temps.yaml` health, HOST/PORT, readiness, SIGTERM, replicas, migrations) and production observability (errors, traces, metrics, logs, analytics, privacy, sampling, cardinality, credential boundaries). Use whenever building or reviewing an app for Temps, configuring health checks, adding telemetry, diagnosing missing/noisy signals, or checking OTLP/Sentry/analytics ingestion. Triggers include "temps best practices", "prepare this app for Temps", ".temps.yaml health", "temps health check", "ignore health checks in otel", "temps observability", "wire up telemetry", and "instrument this app for temps". Prefer focused setup skills for a single SDK. Use temps-cli for executing deploy and resource-management commands.

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 (or restart) a local Temps control plane built from this checkout, and the web dev server (`bun dev`) in `<checkout>/web`. Invoke when the user says "start temps", "restart temps", "launch the server", "kill and restart temps", or asks to bring the local server up after backend changes. Ports, database and data dir are allocated PER CHECKOUT (a "slot") so several worktrees/branches run side by side without killing each other or corrupting each other's schema — the first checkout you start in claims slot 0 (the familiar `:8080` / `:3000`); every other worktree gets its own slot and its own `temps_s<N>` database. Uses the `fast` cargo profile (release semantics, no debug symbols, parallel codegen) for quick rebuilds. Pass `split` (e.g. "start temps split", "/start-temps split") to launch the two-process proxy/console topology for testing that feature.

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 affiliate blog posts and landing pages for SEO issues. Triggers on: "audit my blog post for SEO", "check my SEO", "SEO review", "improve my rankings", "SEO checklist", "on-page SEO audit", "keyword optimization check", "why isn't my page ranking", "SEO score", "content quality audit", "check my meta tags", "internal linking audit", "quick SEO wins".

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 and revise academic papers with a senior-reviewer workflow. Use when an AI research/coding agent needs to work on an existing paper draft, PDF, LaTeX project, Word document, markdown manuscript, rejected paper, or paper idea that already has a concrete direction, and produce: paper maps, weakness audits, insight/novelty checks, reviewer objections, claim-experiment matrices, theory/proof checks, experiment plans, statistics/reproducibility audits, figure/table audits, ethics/compliance checks, revision plans, detailed section edits, or final submission checklists.

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 complete beginner's app idea into a buildable plan, then keep them oriented while they build. Use it whenever someone who has never coded wants to build or "vibe code" an app, has an idea but no idea where to start, or wants it turned into a plan, MVP scope, tech stack, user flows, or blueprint. It has three on-ramps: the full journey, a validate-only pass ("is my idea worth building", "reality-check this idea"), and a plan-only path for someone arriving with validation done ("I already validated my idea", "I have the research, just plan my MVP", "skip the research"). ALSO use it when a non-coder needs build-time basics: what Git and GitHub are, making an account, "commit and push," local vs. staging vs. production, putting an app online (deploy/ship), or keeping API keys safe. AND use it in Checkup Mode when someone who built with AI says it became a mess, the AI keeps breaking things or going in circles, they're scared to touch their code, or they ask "is my code organized" or "can you clean it up." Built for people who don't know what an API, database, or GitHub is, so reach for it when they never say "plan" or "architecture." Not for an experienced dev debugging, refactoring, or setting up CI/CD.

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。

Proactive intelligence pulse — scans user's memory files (USER.md, SOUL.md) to identify current interests, investments, projects, and concerns, then performs targeted web searches to find noteworthy updates. Returns a concise briefing if something deserves attention, or `[SKIPPED]` if nothing warrants interruption. Use this skill when the system needs to check if there's anything worth proactively notifying the user about — like a scheduled heartbeat check, a "what's new" sweep, or when the user asks "anything I should know?", "what did I miss?", or "any updates?". Also triggers on requests like "check my interests", "scan for news", "morning briefing", or "pulse check".

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 code for bugs, security vulnerabilities, API misuse, consistency issues, simplicity problems, or test coverage gaps and low-value tests by running internal reviews and a peer review in parallel and returning combined findings. Single-concern with a type argument, or full review with no argument. Use when the user asks to "review my code", "full code review", "review my changes", "check for bugs", "scan for bugs", "review correctness", "security audit", "find vulnerabilities", "review security", "check API usage", "verify against docs", "check for cross-file duplication", "review consistency", "check for code reuse", "review simplicity", "find untested code", "find redundant tests", or "review test coverage".

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。

Ten minute security pass over a Convex backend: public functions that should be internal, missing auth checks, unvalidated args, IDs from the client trusted without ownership checks, secrets in code. Use before merging a pull request, after adding new public functions, or when the user says 'quick security check'.

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。

Adversarially fact-check DOCS.md files against the actual source code, verifying every concrete claim rather than trusting structure checks. Use when the user asks to audit docs, verify documentation accuracy, check whether docs are still true, or on a scheduled documentation review. This is the semantic layer the mechanical checkers cannot cover.

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。

Assesses decision reversibility and risk at critical checkpoints. Use when a workflow reaches a high-stakes branch needing escalation check.

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。

This skill should be used when the user asks to "revise a chapter", "continuity check", "find inconsistencies", "audit character state", "check timeline consistency", "developmental edit", "structural revision", "reverse outline", "cut a subplot", "revision passes", "what pass next", "pacing check" as a revision pass, "clue check", "cut to a word count", or "length pass", or to prepare existing story material for the next revision pass. NOT for planning book structure (use plot-structure), scene-level craft (use scene-craft), voice consistency (use voice-style), or reconciling a chapter drafted by discovery (use discovery-drafting).

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。

Pre-deployment privacy compliance checklist for AI/ML systems covering DPIA completion, lawful basis verification, transparency notices, human oversight mechanisms, bias testing, and post-deployment monitoring setup. Keywords: AI deployment, privacy checklist, go-live, model deployment, compliance gate.

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。

Design Health — runs 19 deterministic quality checks on HTML output. Use when the user says /reimagine-it audit, "audit this page", "check design quality", or wants to verify craft-floor compliance before shipping. Catches blank plates, missing focus rings, non-compositor motion, off-palette accents, dead motion, fabricated content. No LLM, no API key. CI-ready with --json and exit codes. Part of the reimagine-it Content-Derived Design suite.

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。

Semi-automated fact-checking, source credibility evaluation, misinformation detection, prebunking, and evidence-ledger based claim verification. Use when a user asks to verify a claim, article, social post, screenshot, URL, quote, data point, compare sources, detect manipulation, evaluate source reliability, or generate an HTML fact-check card/share-safe correction. Supports text, URLs, screenshots/images, two-source comparison, and topic-level prebunking in Bulgarian, English, Russian, EU policy, health, science, and geopolitical contexts. Trigger phrases: "is this true?", "is this fake?", "fact check this", "compare these sources", "проверка на факти", "истина ли е", "дезинформация ли е", "сравни тези източници".

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。