「verify」の検索結果

Use when the user starts a non-trivial coding/building task in Claude Code (e.g. "帮我做个 X", "help me build Y", "add feature Z", "搭一个 Z"). Layers an AI-native pedagogical coat over normal coding work — surfaces implicit assumptions in user intent, annotates non-trivial design decisions inline with brief concept-scaffolding for terms the user may not know, and replaces "should I run it?" handoffs with rigorous AI self-verification plus a clean list of what only the user can verify. Skip for pure Q&A, single-line edits, read-only investigation, or refactoring along an existing pattern.

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。

Find top 10 new or improved free-AI-credit offers on X, Reddit, and the web, verify them officially, and open one review PR. Use for /offer-hunter or hunting new AI credits. Don't use for one known offer or catalog re-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。

Re-verify active offers vs official sources, fix drifted terms, refresh evidence, then issue, PR, review, merge unattended; report-only/no-merge modes. Use for daily checks or stale-content issues. Don't use for adding or editing one offer, or CI.

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。

Mutation testing patterns for verifying test effectiveness. Use when analyzing branch code to find weak or missing tests.

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 a language-agnostic ghost package (spec + portable tests) from an existing repo by extracting SPEC.md, exhaustive tests.yaml (operations and/or scenarios), INSTALL.md, README.md, VERIFY.md, and upstream LICENSE files with provenance and regeneration instructions. Use when prompts say "/tw-ghost", "ghostify this repo", "spec-ify/spec-package this library", "ghost library", or ask to extract portable spec/tests for libraries or tool-using agent loops (scenario testing); do not use for implementation work or editing skills.

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。

Acceptance-test newly added features using browser automation, happy-path flows, screenshots, UX notes, and a written report. Use when asked to test a feature, verify a recent UI change, or check whether an app workflow 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 adding a test to an existing codebase for behavior that is already implemented. Ensures the test is meaningful by mutation-verifying it — breaking the production code to confirm the test fails for the expected reason. Triggers when the user says "add a test for existing behavior", "backfill test coverage", "the test passes on first run", or any scenario where a test is written without a corresponding new production 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。

Load for pre-PR self-review or pull-request review that must verify the matched intent, allowed scope, required tests/docs, forbidden actions, architecture gates, and merge readiness; not for a general code-quality diff review alone.

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。

Load when a task asks to research, verify, compare, or look up framework/package behavior, release notes, standards, RFCs, CVEs, or unfamiliar APIs; use repository evidence first, then official docs, and not for codebase navigation alone.

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 the Expanded Guidance for NASA Systems Engineering (NASA/SP-2016-6105-SUPPL, Volume 1, March 2016) — the practitioner-depth supplement to the NASA SE Handbook. Use for the load-bearing mechanics the handbook compresses: the SE Engine's per-phase cadence and the iterative-vs-recursive distinction, the AS9100 crosswalk, life-cycle tailoring vs. customization and the Compliance Matrix, the recursive system-design consistency loop (ConOps vs. Operations Concept, requirement flow/type/ownership, successive refinement), product realization (verify/qualify/accept/certify cardinality, protoflight, 'test the way we fly' coverage, two-form transition), and the crosscutting technical-management procedures (six-step scheduling, cost-estimating method selection, JCL, interface document family, RIDM/CRM, CM baselines, EVM arithmetic, MOE/MOP/KPP/TPM, the three required leading indicators, and the decision-analysis method catalog). This is the DEPTH layer — it deliberately does NOT restate the base definitions; pair it with the nasa-se-handbook pack. Scope: NASA space-flight SE practice (Vol 1 Practices); thin on the Vol 2 process-appendix detail, on non-NASA/commercial life cycles, and on software-engineering methodology.

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 the FAA AMS Lifecycle V&V Guidelines (verification and validation), Version 3.0, dated April 2017. Use for applying verification and validation across the FAA Acquisition Management System (AMS) lifecycle: the verify-vs-validate distinction (built right vs. right thing), the work-product/component/product tiers, the nine V&V planning elements, the four method catalogs (Appendix C), decision-point-gated V&V (SASP, CRD, Investment Analysis, Solution Implementation, In-Service Management), the Appendix B document checklists (PRD/APB/ISPD/PMP), and the DT/OT/IOA test triad. Scope limits: this is an FAA acquisition-V&V doctrine, NOT a general SE process model, requirements-engineering manual, or test-design textbook. It borrows its core V&V definitions from CMMI v1.2 (SEI, paraphrased) and presumes the surrounding AMS lifecycle (see the FAA SEM pack); its phase tables are policy snapshots as of April 2017 and it is thin on detailed test methods, tool specifics, and anything outside FAA acquisition governance.

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。

General Blender workflow skill for AI agents working with .blend, .fbx, .obj, .glb, glTF, materials, scene inspection, bpy automation, headless Blender batch runs, export/reimport validation, previews, and optional Blender MCP control. Use when a task asks to open, inspect, create, automate, convert, optimize, render, or verify Blender or 3D asset files in a user-agnostic way.

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。

Baut und prüft neue Agentenrollen im ellmos-Ökosystem: native Claude-Code- Subagenten (dauerhafte Rollendefinition) und Companion-Worker (SendMessage- wiederverwendete Instanz für eine Ticket-/Aufgabenserie). Formalisiert das bislang unformalisierte eigene Wissen aus dem laufenden Bau von Agentenrollen (ati-agent, bueroassistent, versicherungs-agent u. a.) zu einem wiederverwendbaren Scaffold-plus-Verify-Ablauf. Nutze diesen Skill, wenn eine neue Rolle entstehen soll ("neue Agentenrolle bauen", "Subagent anlegen", "Companion-Worker starten") oder eine bestehende gegen die Haus-Konventionen geprüft werden soll ("ist dieser Agent richtig aufgesetzt?").

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。

Protocol for safely creating, publishing, releasing, auditing, and maintaining GitHub repositories: check local rules and locks, create .gitignore before the first add, run privacy checks, prepare README/i18n/banner/metadata, verify release tags and GitHub releases, and update organization profiles, llms.txt files, and registry links.

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。

Reads one spreadsheet, CSV export or pasted table together with the user's question and drafts an insight pack: a data profile, observations cited to named columns and values and framed as leads, caveats, and suggested charts and follow-up analyses. Every figure carries the label "as read, verify in source"; correlation is never stated as causation. Use when the user asks to "profile this spreadsheet", "what does this data say", "find anomalies in this extract", "give me a first read on this CSV" or "summarise this table". Do not use for a purchase order log or spend extract, use purchase-order-anomaly-review instead; for actuals versus budget, use budget-variance-explainer instead; for a report that arrives by email on a schedule, use report-attachment-analyzer instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

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。

Checks an extracted PFD register as a process model and returns findings and unknowns only: connectivity closure, stream numbering, presence of design conditions, equipment duty text, phase and service labels, package and off-sheet scope, boundaries, operating cases, and agreement between the drawing and attached process documents, then holds at gate G2. Creates no design values. Use when the user asks to "check the process model", "verify connectivity" or "is the PFD ready for enrichment" after gate G1 and before enrichment. Do not use for extraction from the drawing, use pfd-intake-and-extraction instead; do not use to propose lines or instruments, use piping-enrichment. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

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。

Turns an actuals-versus-budget extract (spreadsheet, export or pasted table) into a DRAFT variance table with absolute and percentage variances, favourable or adverse marking and a ranking by size, then drafts plain-language driver hypotheses for each material variance as questions to verify with a named owner, never as asserted causes. Use when the user asks to "explain these variances", "why are we over budget on this line", "write the variance commentary for the management pack", "actuals versus budget analysis" or "which lines drive the variance". Do not use for a dataset with no budget or comparison column, use dataset-insight-pack instead; for weekly operational figures against last week, use kpi-weekly-report-writer. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

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。

Send transactional email and manage domains, contacts, audiences, and broadcasts via the Resend REST API. Use when the user wants to send mail, verify a sending domain, trigger a broadcast, or mutate contacts programmatically — instead of writing SMTP glue, pasting into a UI, or asking them to send the message by hand.

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。

- Entry point for open-source intelligence, investigation and verification work. Use when asked to investigate, research, verify, vet, check out, look up, background-check, trace, attribute or find someone or something; when a request involves due diligence, KYC or KYB, counterparty or vendor risk, sanctions and PEP screening, AML, fraud, business email compromise

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 workflow to establish where and when a photo or video was captured and whether it is authentic — evidentiary handling, metadata extraction, reverse image search for provenance, visual geolocation, chronolocation from shadows, and manipulation… Use when asked to verify where an image was taken, confirm or refute a claimed location or date, or authenticate media before relying on 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。

- Corporate due-diligence workflow — resolve a brand or website to its registered legal entity, map group structure and beneficial ownership, profile officers and directors, enumerate the digital estate, and screen litigation, insolvency,… Use when asked to check out, vet or research a company, verify a supplier or counterparty before signing or paying, or assess whether a business is real

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。

Get a second opinion from an external LLM at three checkpoints: T1 is the plan valid, T2 which path at a fork, T3 finish plus a QA breaker that tries to break the result. One structured move per exchange (PROPOSE, COUNTER, VERIFY, ACCEPT, BLOCK) with memory across turns, and every exchange mirrored into a human-visible channel. Supports a multi-vendor panel instead of a single reviewer. Triggers: "/secondop", "get a second opinion", "run the review panel".

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 whether an image or video is authentic, original and correctly captioned — provenance checks, error level analysis, noise and JPEG compression analysis, clone and copy-move detection, lighting and shadow consistency, C2PA… Use when fact-checking a photo or video, checking for a deepfake or AI-generated image, spotting manipulation, or testing whether footage is recycled or miscaptioned

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。

Reboot a fleet node safely by one protocol: pre-flight (save state, finish syncing, warn peers, verify autostart is armed), then a full restart rather than a fast-startup hybrid, then a post-reboot check through the crash-recovery skill. Triggers: "/reboot", "restart this machine".

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。