「correctness」の検索結果

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。

Review the working-tree changes (vs main) for correctness, concurrency, architecture, testing, and API/doc issues — following .github/CODE_REVIEW.md — and return a severity-graded report. Scales the machinery to the diff size: a single code-reviewer agent for a small change, or a fan-out-and-verify Workflow for a large/multi-unit one. Produces findings; it does not apply fixes (the caller does).

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 evidence loop of one long-horizon GPU kernel optimization episode. Use this skill to reconstruct the incumbent, profile and localize a bottleneck, research progressively, plan one coherent direction, implement and repair, validate development correctness and performance, and record every decisive experiment in the episode journal.

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。

Perform thorough code reviews with actionable, prioritized feedback. Use when a user asks to review code, check code quality, find bugs, review a pull request, audit code for issues, or get feedback on implementation. Covers correctness, security, performance, readability, and best practices across languages.

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 pull request for correctness, regressions, and missing tests. Use when a mid-level developer needs structured review guidance.

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 infrastructure-as-code changes for safety and correctness. Use when a mid-level developer needs a second look on IaC.

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。

Comprehensive verification system for Claude Code sessions. Use after implementation to validate 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。

Use when the user invokes /cr, requests a code review, or before committing to verify correctness, security, and quality of new or modified code in the working tree.

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 a directory of multilingual blog content for completeness, consistency, hreflang correctness, meta-tag parity, and freshness. Builds a translation coverage matrix, flags stale translations, validates hreflang and schema, and emits a prioritized report with runnable fix commands. Use when user says "locale audit", "blog locale-audit", "check translations", "multilingual audit", "translation check", "hreflang check", "Uebersetzungen pruefen".

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。

Default Looper review method for implementation and spec PRs. Read before reviewing. Covers correctness, tests, concurrency, contracts, and comment 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。

Use when auditing a user-facing app — web, mobile (iOS/Android/React Native/Flutter), desktop, CLI, or games — for accessibility barriers or WCAG 2.2 conformance, before shipping UI changes, or in response to concerns about screen-reader, keyboard, low-vision, motor, cognitive, or photosensitive users. Not for general bug hunting or 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。

Suede AI blunt A-F ship grade for a code change across correctness, security and permissions, data and state, domain truth, UX and release behavior, tests and verification, and deploy readiness, with Instant-F triggers and evidence-based grade caps on auth, payment, migration, and public-API surfaces. Use when asked to grade this, give it a letter, is this an A, how ready is this to ship, or should this merge: when the caller wants the verdict without a findings list. NOT FOR: findings, evidence, and fix briefs (use suede-code-review, or suede-code for findings plus grade); enforcing the verdict in CI (use suede-ci-gate); eval coverage for AI behavior (use suede-ai-eval).

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 quality, correctness, and fit. Use when the user wants judgment on code that already exists — their own changes, a teammate's patch, a PR, branch, commit, diff, staged changes, or one or more files to look over. Activate on requests like review, look over, sanity check, critique, code review, or 'is this good?' The key signal is that the user wants evaluation of existing code and its tradeoffs, not implementation, debugging, or explanation. This skill works independently, but when plans, specs, task artifacts, or prior discussion exist, use them to understand why the code exists before judging it.

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。

Automated Planning utilities for loading PDDL domains and problems, generating plans using classical planners, validating plans, and saving plan outputs. Supports standard PDDL parsing, plan synthesis, and correctness 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。

Expert code reviewer. Analyze PR changes for correctness, security, performance, and quality. Returns findings as JSON. CRITICAL: this skill is costly, don't use it unless user explicitly requested to use it.

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 changes for correctness, security, performance, and code quality. Use when the user asks to review a diff, review code changes, review commits, or perform a code review. Input can be: (1) a text diff pasted directly, (2) one or more git commit hashes to extract the diff from, or (3) a git range like abc123..def456. The user may also provide task description or requirements that motivated the change.

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 writing or changing analytical SQL or a dbt model — CTE structure, window functions, grain and join correctness, dbt data tests, unit tests, contracts and incremental models, and how to run them

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。

Validate DESIGN.md files against the official Google specification using the `@google/design.md` CLI linter. Works with local files. Use when the user wants to lint a DESIGN.md, check spec compliance, find broken token references, verify WCAG contrast ratios, diff two versions, export tokens to Tailwind or DTCG format, or audit a design system file for structural correctness. Trigger on mentions of "validate DESIGN.md", "lint DESIGN.md", "check my design.md", "design.md spec compliance", "WCAG contrast check", "broken token references", "design token validation", "export design tokens", "diff design systems", "design.md audit", "@google/design.md", "npx design.md lint", "design system validation", "frontmatter tokens", or any request to verify a DESIGN.md file.

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。

Reviews a GitHub pull request or focused branch diff for correctness, regressions, security, compatibility, test gaps, and maintainability. Use when an implementation needs an independent source-aware review before merge. Produces prioritized findings with evidence and actionable fixes. Not for architecture-only audits, formatting preferences, or processing existing review feedback.

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。

Prepares a focused code review request for a branch, commit, pull request, or substantial working-tree diff by defining the review boundary, contract, risk areas, evidence, and questions for an independent reviewer. Use before merge or when another agent needs to review an implementation. Not for processing feedback already received or for claiming runtime 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。

Audit a .glb or .gltf and make it small, correct, and fast to load in a browser, with a measured before/after report. Use when a model is "too big" or "slow to load", when the user asks to "optimize this GLB", "compress this glTF", or "export for web", or when they mention Draco, meshopt, gltfpack, KTX2, Basis, texture VRAM, draw calls, or a Blender / CAD / photogrammetry / Pascal export headed for Three.js, React Three Fiber (drei useGLTF), Babylon.js, or model-viewer. Covers inspection, spec validation, geometry and texture compression, scene-graph cleanup, and the correctness checks (metres, Y-up, node names, animations, PBR fidelity, alpha modes, vertex colors) that must not regress. Not for editing or modelling geometry, authoring or laying out a scene, generating 3D from text or images, converting from FBX/OBJ/CAD, or debugging a runtime frame rate that has nothing to do with asset size.

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。

Applies systematic code review patterns and checklists. Use when reviewing PRs or diffs for correctness, security, readability, maintainability, and AI-generated 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。

Static code review of the active diff: trace changed paths and report concrete P1/P2/P3 correctness, security, or spec bugs with file:line evidence. Use for code review or bug checks. Not runtime 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。

Validate skill files for structural compliance and behavioral correctness. Three modes: static (linter), spec (behavioral), audit (coverage report).

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。