371 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Provides patterns for testing utility classes, static methods, and helper functions. Validates pure functions, null handling, edge cases, and boundary conditions. Generates AssertJ assertions and @ParameterizedTest for string utils, math utils, validators, and collection helpers. Use when testing utils, test helpers, helper functions, static methods, or verifying utility code correctness.
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。
Provides a structured 8-phase workflow for resolving GitHub issues in Claude Code. Covers fetching issue details, analyzing requirements, implementing solutions, verifying correctness, performing code review, committing changes, and creating pull requests. Use when user asks to resolve, implement, work on, fix, or close a GitHub issue, or references an issue URL or number for 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。
Use the OpenConstructionERP validation engine: rule packs (BOQ quality, DIN 276, NRM, GAEB, MasterFormat, DPGF) that check estimates at import time and on demand. Use when verifying BOQ correctness or writing custom validation 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。
MLflow 3 GenAI agent evaluation. Use when writing mlflow.genai.evaluate() code, creating @scorer functions, using built-in scorers (Guidelines, Correctness, Safety, RetrievalGroundedness), building eval datasets from traces, setting up trace ingestion and production monitoring, aligning judges with MemAlign from domain expert feedback, or running optimize_prompts() with GEPA for automated prompt improvement.
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。
Audits Makefiles for build correctness, portability, and recipe duplication. Use when reviewing a Makefile or before committing Makefile changes.
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。
Verifies math-heavy code for algorithmic correctness and numerical stability. Use when reviewing scientific algorithms, ML models, or numerical 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。
Audits shell scripts for correctness, portability, and common pitfalls. Use when reviewing shell scripts or before committing shell changes.
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 a deep code review of files, modules, a diff, or a branch - finding security vulnerabilities (mapped to OWASP Top 10:2025), correctness bugs, performance problems, and maintainability issues - and returns severity-ranked findings with evidence and concrete fixes. Use when the user asks to review, audit, or sanity-check code, asks "is this safe", "what's wrong with this", "find bugs", or wants a security or performance pass before shipping. For posting line comments on a GitHub pull request, use git-pr-reviewer.
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 here for any iOS or SwiftUI task. Coordinates best-practice guides, correctness checks, and full Apple API references. Use before navigating to other Apple skills — for building, reviewing, refactoring, or debugging iOS apps.
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, review, or improve SwiftUI features using the iOS 26+ Liquid Glass API. Use when asked to adopt Liquid Glass in new SwiftUI UI, refactor an existing feature to Liquid Glass, or review Liquid Glass usage for correctness, performance, and design alignment.
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 diff for what Honey would cut — over-engineering (speculative generality, hand-rolled stdlib, single-caller abstractions) and over-verbosity (dead code, narration, redundant comments). Outputs a terse delete-list, one line per finding, with the line count each cut saves. Use when asked to review, trim, or de-bloat a change, or before opening a PR. Quality lever only — it finds waste, not correctness bugs.
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。
Generates automated test oracles to verify correct software behavior. Creates assertion-based oracles (expected values), property-based oracles (invariants), differential oracles (comparing implementations), and metamorphic oracles (input transformations). Use when you need to generate assertions for test cases, identify invariants that should always hold, compare new vs legacy implementations, create metamorphic test relationships, validate function correctness, or improve test coverage with better verification strategies. Supports Python (pytest, unittest, hypothesis) and Java (JUnit, property 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。
Establish explicit traceability between formal specifications (preconditions, postconditions, invariants) and verified code components with their correctness proofs. Produce structured Markdown mapping reports showing verification coverage and proof evidence. Use when auditing formal verification, documenting verified systems, establishing traceability for certification, or when the user asks to map specifications to code, generate verification reports, or analyze verification coverage in Coq, Dafny, Isabelle, or other proof assistants.
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。
Automatically infer formal correctness properties from Verilog/SystemVerilog RTL code and generate SystemVerilog Assertions (SVA). Identifies control-flow invariants (mutual exclusion, valid-ready handshakes, pipeline ordering, safety properties), liveness expectations, and temporal properties. Use when working with RTL designs that need formal property generation, when adding assertions to existing RTL, or when users ask to infer properties, generate assertions, or create formal specifications from hardware designs.
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。
Generate systematic refinement steps from high-level specifications to concrete implementations in Isabelle/HOL or Coq, preserving correctness obligations at each step. Use when working with formal verification, program refinement, proof development, or when translating abstract specifications into executable code while maintaining formal guarantees. Supports data refinement (abstract types → concrete structures), algorithmic refinement (specifications → algorithms), and stepwise refinement with proof obligations.
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 that interface and class contracts (preconditions, postconditions, invariants) are preserved across program versions. Use when validating refactorings, checking API compatibility, verifying design-by-contract implementations, or ensuring behavioral contracts remain intact after code changes. Automatically detects contract violations, identifies affected methods and classes, and provides actionable guidance for resolving violations while maintaining program correctness.
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。
Automatically repair buggy code and generate comprehensive tests for Python, Java, and C++ programs. Use when users need to fix logic errors or runtime errors in functions, modules, or repositories. Accepts specifications via natural language descriptions, existing test cases, or input/output examples. Generates corrected code, creates or updates tests to verify correctness and prevent regressions, and produces a detailed report explaining the bug, fix, and testing strategy. Triggers on requests like "fix this bug", "repair this code", "debug this function", or "this code is broken".
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。
Conduct comprehensive code reviews identifying bugs, security issues, performance problems, code quality concerns, and best practice violations. Use when reviewing pull requests, examining code changes, evaluating new code, assessing code quality, or providing feedback on implementations. Analyzes code for correctness, security vulnerabilities, performance bottlenecks, maintainability issues, test coverage, documentation quality, and adherence to coding standards. Produces structured markdown reviews with categorized findings, severity ratings, specific examples, and actionable recommendations. Triggers when users ask to review code, check pull requests, evaluate implementations, find bugs, or assess code quality.
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。
Uses abstract interpretation to automatically infer loop invariants, function preconditions, and postconditions for formal verification. Generates invariants that capture program behavior and support correctness proofs in Dafny, Isabelle, Coq, and other verification systems. Use when adding formal specifications to code, generating verification conditions, inferring contracts for functions, or discovering loop invariants for proofs.
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 the weak-agent adversarial test harness against docx-cli. Spawns weak exercise agents (Haiku by default, Sonnet to probe, or a local agent harness's pre-produced runs) to perform real document tasks over six scenarios — five editing (MNDA form-fill + font fidelity, invoice table-edit/restructure + logo replace, résumé styling, contract redlining + commenting, contract finalize via accept/reject + comment reply/resolve) and one authoring (T. S. Eliot poetry journal: multi-column, verse, footnotes, links, figure) — renders every result with Word, has opus judge them against ground-truth rubrics, measures each exercise's tool economy, token cost, wall-clock, and correctness (from transcripts for Claude, the exercise.json ledger for the local harness), and synthesizes a prioritized ergonomics report. Use when the user says 'adversarial review', 'test docx-cli with weak agents', 'run the haiku harness', 'weak agent test', or wants to re-run yesterday's adversarial process.
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 Auto 档 scenario — a soft-plan orchestrator for a complete fundamental equity research thesis: understand → financials → valuation → synthesize. The body is a soft plan (stages), not a rigid DAG; correctness is enforced by each referenced skill's own requires: preconditions, never by this plan's rigidity (Q2).
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。
Think and work like an expert Database Systems Researcher. Use when a task calls for Database Systems Researcher judgment. Reasons from storage hierarchy, concurrency semantics, query-optimization theory, and declared workload models through TPC-C/H, YCSB, and JOB benchmarks, Jepsen/Elle correctness checkers, and perf/blktrace/fio profiling while treating cardinality-estimation plan regressions, tail-latency spikes under skew, unfair fsync-disabled speedups, and benchmark-trick wins as first-class failure modes.
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。
Production-grade Python and AI engineering standards. Use for ANY Python work — FastAPI services, LangChain/LangGraph agents, RAG pipelines, LLM API integrations, document processing, or data scripts — whether writing new code, reviewing, refactoring, or debugging. Enforces typed Pydantic boundaries, structured errors and logging, LLM call timeouts/retries/output validation, secret management, async correctness, and tested 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。
Review Java code for bugs, duplicate code, correctness risks, maintainability improvements, and missing tests. By default review files modified in git; when the user explicitly names files, classes, packages, or a diff, review that scope instead. Generate a detailed review.md report with actionable comments and fixes.
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。