「code quality」の検索結果

Elite code review expert specializing in modern AI-powered code analysis, security vulnerabilities, performance optimization, and production reliability. Masters static analysis tools, security scanning, and configuration review with 2024/2025 best practices. Use PROACTIVELY for code quality assurance.

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 comparing two videos to analyze compression results or quality differences. Generates interactive HTML reports with quality metrics (PSNR, SSIM) and frame-by-frame visual comparisons. Triggers when users mention "compare videos", "video quality", "compression analysis", "before/after compression", or request quality assessment of compressed videos.

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 live air quality anywhere with zero API keys — Open-Meteo's air-quality API via curl, decoded from raw PM2.5 and AQI numbers into what they mean for going outside. Use when asked what's the air quality, is it safe to run outside, AQI in my city, or pollution levels right now. Produces the current AQI and pollutant levels, the plain-language health read with the standard bands, and the rerunnable command.

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 a full codebase review, categorize findings by severity, file GitHub issues, then fix each issue in an isolated git worktree and submit PRs. Use this skill when the user asks to audit the codebase, do a comprehensive code review, find and fix security/quality/reliability issues, or run a proactive health check across the entire repository.

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 a comprehensive code health check on a directory. Use when the user asks to analyze code quality, find issues, or get a health 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。

Review Python code for quality, security, and best practices

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 code reviews following Sentry engineering practices. Use when reviewing pull requests, examining code changes, or providing feedback on code quality. Covers security, performance, testing, and design 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。

Use after every code change, after writing tests, or before marking a task complete, and when the user says verify, quality gate, or audit code. Runs a 7-category mechanical check for TDZ, import, dead code, and mock leakage 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。

Conduct high-quality, persona-driven code reviews. Use when reviewing PRs, critiquing code quality, or analyzing changes for team 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。

General code quality review — project guideline compliance, bug detection, code quality analysis.

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。

Agents should invoke this skill for code reviews, linting/formatting setup, maintainability checks, complexity concerns, warning cleanup, coding standards, or quality gates in Rust, TypeScript, Python, shell, and mixed repos.

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。

Security scan, dead code detection, and code quality audit for any project

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 you need to review, improve, or refactor Java code for generics quality — including avoiding raw types, applying the PECS (Producer Extends Consumer Super) principle for wildcards, using bounded type parameters, designing effective generic methods, leveraging the diamond operator, understanding type erasure implications, handling generic inheritance correctly, preventing heap pollution with @SafeVarargs, and integrating generics with modern Java features like Records, sealed types, and pattern matching. This should trigger for requests such as Improve the code with Generics; Apply Generics; Refactor the code with Generics; Improve generic type safety in Java APIs; Fix raw types and unchecked casts in Java code. Part of Plinth Toolkit

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。

Code quality: cleanup, linting, formatting, quality gates.

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 this skill when user asks to "review code", "check for issues", "analyze code quality", "find bugs", or wants feedback on code 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。

Stage, format, lint, test, review, smoke test, and re-run itself until stable. Use when the user asks to "polish code", "refine code", "iterate on code quality", "review loop", "clean up, test, and review loop", or "run the polish loop".

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 SonarQube and SonarCloud integration patterns via the Model Context Protocol (MCP) server. Enables quality gate monitoring, issue discovery and triaging, pre-push code analysis, and rule education directly in the agent workflow. Use when the user wants to check quality gates, search for Sonar issues, analyze code snippets before committing, or understand SonarQube rules. Triggers on "sonarqube", "sonarcloud", "quality gate", "sonar issues", "analyze with sonar", "check sonar", "sonar rule", "pre-push analysis".

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。

Delegates execution to eight CLIs (Gemini, Qwen, MiniMax, GLM, Muse, Codex, OpenCode, Glimmer). Use for execution tasks. Do not use for secrets.

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。

Orchestrates the QUALITY pipeline stage for egregore work items, running code review, unbloat, and test updates. Use when running quality checks before a PR.

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 KISS, YAGNI, and SOLID principles for clean code with reduced complexity. Use when refactoring or reviewing code for over-engineering.

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。

Polishes working code through successive quality passes in fresh subagents. Use after tests pass when code needs multi-dimension refinement before release.

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。

Produce a plain-language manual test plan from the context supplied to it — an executive summary, a high-level list of named tests, and a detail section per test with the steps a person follows by hand and the outcomes they should expect. Use when you want to create, draft, generate, or outline a manual test plan, manual QA steps, hands-on verification steps, or an acceptance walkthrough for a feature, change, branch, plan, or PR. When the plan holds more than five tests and at least two natural categories emerge, both the test list and the detail sections are organized under plain-language categories. When nothing in the supplied context can be manually tested, it says so and asks for more context instead of producing a document. Does not analyze code for automated test coverage gaps — use automated-test-planning. Does not write test code — use tdd. Does not review code quality — use code-review. Does not stress-test an existing plan — use iterative-plan-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。

Performs deep architectural analysis of a specified module, directory, or feature area by examining structural coupling, data flow, concurrency patterns, risk, and SOLID alignment. Use when the user wants to assess, evaluate, or review the architecture, design quality, dependency structure, coupling, cohesion, or technical debt of an existing part of the codebase. Not for investigating specific bugs, runtime errors, or failures — use investigate. Not for test planning — use automated-test-planning. Not for file-level code review — use code-review. Not for researching open-ended options, prior art, or how something works — use research. Not for designing a new interface or contract — use design-an-api. Not for planning the change its findings imply — use plan-a-change. Not for discovering bounded contexts, ubiquitous language, or where code boundaries diverge from domain boundaries — use ddd-analysis. Not for writing documentation or architectural decision records.

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。

Detect and analyze areas with high maintenance cost, poor design, or accumulated technical debt. Use this skill when reviewing codebases for quality issues, planning refactoring efforts, conducting code audits, assessing project health, identifying maintenance hotspots, or prioritizing technical improvements. Analyzes code smells, architectural issues, dependency problems, test quality, documentation gaps, and provides actionable recommendations with priority rankings.

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。