「cases」の検索結果

Generate randomized and edge-case inputs to detect unexpected failures, bugs, and security vulnerabilities through fuzz testing. Use when creating test cases for robustness testing, generating adversarial inputs, testing error handling, finding edge cases, or security testing. Produces Python test code with fuzzing inputs for strings, numbers, and structured data focusing on edge cases, invalid inputs, and random valid inputs. Triggers when users ask to generate fuzz tests, create randomized test inputs, test edge cases, find bugs through fuzzing, or generate adversarial test cases.

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。

Manage Google Security Operations (SecOps) SOAR cases throughout their lifecycle. Use when listing, creating, inspecting, updating, or closing SOAR cases; adding investigative comments and notes; updating case priority or description; or linking and grouping security alerts within cases. Supports both remote Google SecOps MCP tools and local fallback tools. Don't use for SIEM UDM searches or detection rule authoring.

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 identify potential boundary and exception cases from requirements, specifications, or existing code, and generate comprehensive test cases targeting boundary conditions, edge cases, and uncommon scenarios. Use this skill when analyzing programs, code repositories, functions, or APIs to discover and test corner cases, null handling, overflow conditions, empty inputs, concurrent access patterns, and other exceptional scenarios that are often missed in standard 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。

Manage Google Security Operations (SecOps) SOAR cases throughout their lifecycle. Use when listing, creating, inspecting, updating, or closing SOAR cases; adding investigative comments and notes; updating case priority or description; or linking and grouping security alerts within cases. Supports both remote Google SecOps MCP tools and local fallback tools. Don't use for SIEM UDM searches or detection rule authoring.

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。

Virtual QA Lead that turns requirements into review-ready, TestRail-importable test cases in one conversation. Use it whenever the user has requirements, a spec, a user story, or acceptance criteria (PDF, DOCX, XLSX, TXT, MD, or pasted text) and wants test cases, a test plan, a checklist, test coverage, a regression suite, or a TestRail/Qase/Zephyr export, even without saying "test cases" ("write tests for this spec", "what should we check here?"). Especially useful when they attach their team's existing test cases to match. When the spec describes an API (endpoints, status codes, schemas, auth, OpenAPI/Swagger), Casely also builds a runnable Postman collection, so use it for "API tests", "Postman collection", or "tests I can run in Newman/CI". Triggers on the same request in any language.

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。

Goのテストを先に書く開発手順に沿い、複数ケースの検証、HTTP応答の確認、性能測定、入力の自動生成による検査、カバレッジ確認を支援するスキル。

• テストを先に書いてGoを開発したいとき
• 既存テストの正常系・異常系を補いたいとき
• 処理時間とメモリ確保量の比較

Property-based testing with fast-check (TypeScript/JavaScript) and Hypothesis (Python). Generate test cases automatically, find edge cases, and test mathematical properties. Use when user mentions property-based testing, fast-check, Hypothesis, generating test data, QuickCheck-style testing, or finding edge cases automatically.

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。

Plan tests for an API endpoint or service — functional, negative, and contract. Use when asked to test an API, write API test cases, plan REST/GraphQL endpoint testing, or validate an API contract. Produces an API test plan — per-endpoint cases (status codes, schema, auth, validation, errors), boundary/negative cases, contract checks, and non-functional notes — so the API is verified beyond the happy 200.

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 comprehensive test scenarios from requirements including BDD/Gherkin scenarios, unit tests, integration tests, and end-to-end test cases. Use when converting requirements, user stories, or specifications into testable scenarios with full coverage including happy paths, error cases, edge cases, and boundary conditions. Outputs structured test suites ready 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。

Generate test cases using metamorphic testing by applying transformations based on metamorphic properties. Use when you need to expand test suites, test programs without oracles, validate mathematical or algorithmic properties, or detect subtle bugs through input-output relationships. The skill takes a program, original test cases, and metamorphic properties as input, generates new test cases by applying transformations, executes tests, verifies outputs satisfy properties, reports violations and anomalies, and outputs an expanded test suite with property coverage summary. Supports multiple programming languages and property types.

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。

Define test cases BEFORE implementation, ensuring every API, business rule, and user journey has verifiable acceptance criteria during PRD v0.7 Build Execution. Triggers on requests to define tests, plan test coverage, create test cases, or when user asks "define tests", "test planning", "what to test?", "test cases", "test coverage", "TEST-", "test-first". Consumes EPIC- (scope), API-, DBT-, BR-, UJ-. Outputs TEST- entries with Given-When-Then format. Feeds v0.7 Implementation 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。

GitHub 解封 — 账号封禁/限制/恢复的领域操作系统。覆盖：(a) GitHub 官方政策体系 (TOS / 可接受使用政策 / Trust & Safety 执行模式 / 公开申诉路径 / 受制裁地区解读)；(b) 封号原因诊断学 (spam / abuse / 制裁误标 / 2FA 丢失 / ToS 违规 / 账号劫持误判 / ban evasion 等子类型 + 症状→原因映射 + 自我分诊压测)；(c) 申诉实操 craft (写一封能让 T&S 快速判误伤的英文申诉信 + 升级阶梯 + 法务介入边界 + Don'ts)；(d) 制裁与合规硬边界 (OFAC SDN 名单 / 哪些国家或地区真不可达 / VPN 误判路径 / 中国大陆不是美国制裁地区的反复重申)；(e) 中国大陆开发者特别处境 (sanctioned region 误标 + SMS 验证不支持 +86/+852 + Gitee/GitLab/Codeberg/JihuLab 备用迁移 + 私有自托管 Gitea/Forgejo)；(f) 真实案例库 (~30+ 公开案例分类拆解：误伤 / 真违规 / 制裁误标三类各自赔率与申诉成功路径)。伦理锚绝不软化：不教 ban evasion / 不教撒谎式申诉 / 真违规承认改进 / 丢 2FA 无恢复因子则诚实告知 / 中国制裁误标靠申诉不靠换 VPN / 申诉 6 个月窗口必算清 / 约 3% (业内估) 真违规恢复 vs 约 79% (业内估) 误伤申诉成功率分层标。 (GitHub Account Reinstatement — the domain operating system for GitHub (and analogous platform) account suspension, restriction, appeal, and recovery. Covers: (a) GitHub official policy architecture (TOS / Acceptable Use Policies / Trust & Safety enforcement patterns / public appeals pathways / sanctioned-region interpretation); (b) suspension-cause diagnostics (spam / abuse / sanctions mis-flag / 2FA loss / ToS violation / account hijack false-positive / ban evasion taxonomy + symptom→cause mapping + self-triage pressure test); (c) appeal craft (writing an English appeal letter that gets T&S to fast-track a false-positive ruling + escalation ladder + legal-engagement boundary + Don'ts); (d) sanctions and compliance hard boundaries (OFAC SDN list / which countries/regions are truly unreachable / VPN false-positive paths / China is NOT a US-sanctioned region — repeated emphasis); (e) mainland China developer special circumstances (sanctioned-region mis-flag + SMS verification does not support +86/+852 + Gitee/GitLab/Codeberg/JihuLab fallback migration + self-hosted Gitea/Forgejo); (f) real-case library (~30+ public cases with categorized analysis: false-positive / genuine violation / sanctions mis-flag, each with win-rate and appeal success path). Ethical anchors absolutely not softened: do NOT teach ban evasion (creating new accounts turns a temp ban into a permanent one — the single biggest mistake); do NOT teach social engineering or lying in appeals (misuse + actually confirms violation); genuine violations: admit + improve beats denial; lost 2FA + no recovery factor → do not pretend recovery is possible; China sanctioned-region mis-flag → fix via appeal, not repeated VPN switching; appeal form 6-month window must be counted carefully; historical 约 3% (业内估) genuine-violation recovery vs 约 79% (业内估) false-positive appeal success rate stratification must be honestly labeled. Anti-samples (explicitly describe harm, never endorse): developer permabanned for ban evasion / open-source team org-banned for personal attacks in public issues / cases where repeated VPN switching escalated risk-control severity.) Master OS — automated mastery of GitHub Account Reinstatement — the domain operating system for GitHub (and analogous platform) account suspension, restriction, appeal, and recovery. Covers: (a) GitHub official policy architecture (TOS / Acceptable Use Policies / Trust & Safety enforcement patterns / public appeals pathways / sanctioned-region interpretation); (b) suspension-cause diagnostics (spam / abuse / sanctions mis-flag / 2FA loss / ToS violation / account hijack false-positive / ban evasion taxonomy + symptom→cause mapping + self-triage pressure test); (c) appeal craft (writing an English appeal letter that gets T&S to fast-track a false-positive ruling + escalation ladder + legal-engagement boundary + Don'ts); (d) sanctions and compliance hard boundaries (OFAC SDN list / which countries/regions are truly unreachable / VPN false-positive paths / China is NOT a US-sanctioned region — repeated emphasis); (e) mainland China developer special circumstances (sanctioned-region mis-flag + SMS verification does not support +86/+852 + Gitee/GitLab/Codeberg/JihuLab fallback migration + self-hosted Gitea/Forgejo); (f) real-case library (~30+ public cases with categorized analysis: fa

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 and write QA test artifacts - test cases, test plans, acceptance criteria, API test specs, and PR testability reviews. Use this skill whenever a QA engineer or SDET needs to translate requirements, user stories, or feature specs into structured test documentation. Trigger on phrases like "write test cases", "create a test plan", "define acceptance criteria", "review this PR for testability", "write API test specs", "test coverage for this feature", "what should we test", "how do we test this", or any request to structure what and how to test before execution begins. Also trigger when a developer asks "is this testable?" or a PM asks "what are the edge cases?".

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。

実装差分が plan / todo / test-cases アーティファクトの方針と一致しているかを検査し、逸脱・漏れ・意図外変更を検知する

Pythonのテストをpytestで設計・作成し、共通の準備処理や外部サービスの代役、複数入力の検証、テストで確認したコードの範囲の測定まで扱うスキル。

• Pythonの機能をテストから作りたいとき
• テストの準備処理を共通化したいとき
• 外部APIをモックで検証したいとき

Author an eval for an existing skill from its REAL usage history, not its spec. Mine invocations from the brain's conversation archive (conversations/) and per-harness session transcripts — a user correction after an invocation is the gold signal — then synthesize an eval_contract plus 4-8 replayable cases with honesty labels (SPEC-DERIVED vs HISTORY-IMPLIED) and stage the result at skills/<name>/eval/autobench-<date>.md as PENDING-HUMAN-APPROVAL. Never rewrites SKILL.md. Ships two guard companions: panel integrity (multi-model judging must prove each provider actually responded) and the fail-improve taxonomy (logged LLM-fallback cases convert to deterministic code over time).

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。

Sync tests with TestRail. Use when user mentions "testrail", "test management", "test cases", "test run", "sync test cases", "push results to testrail", or "import from testrail".

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。

Phase 3 of building a Claude Managed Agent — the bounded grade→iterate loop. Define a CMA outcome (a required markdown rubric graded by an isolated grader), read each verdict, decide the next move (sharpen / re-run / promote to schedule), and once a version passes, run held-back eval cases in parallel. Use when the user says "grade my agent", "make it pass the rubric", "iterate until it's good", "is it good enough", or when the orchestrator routes phase=grade-iterate. outcome_builder.py builds the user.define_outcome payload (rubric required, max_iterations clamped 1..20 — never unbounded); verdict_reader.py reads the grader result and recommends the next move; eval_scaffold.py generates held-back cases + a parallel run plan (capped at the 25-thread CMA ceiling). Distinct from stage-launch (first launch) and run-without-you (scheduling).

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 guidance for deep security incident and entity investigations in Google SecOps. Use when investigating cases, analyzing entities (hosts, IPs, domains, hashes, users), extracting and searching UDM events, performing asset and user timeline analysis, and detecting lateral movement across enterprise networks. Don't use for detection rule authoring or YARA-L tuning (use secops-detection-engineering), proactive hypothesis-driven hunting (use secops-hunt), initial alert triage (use secops-triage), or basic case status updates (use secops-cases).

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。

Add regression test cases to the Bifrost provider harness (the Postman collection run via `make run-provider-harness-test`) based on a merged PR or a GitHub issue. Fetches the PR/issue, traces the affected wire path in the codebase, checks existing harness coverage, designs cases following harness conventions, inserts them into tests/e2e/api/collections/provider-harness.json without reformatting the file, and validates via the augment and filter scripts. Invoked with /harness-test-writer <PR# | issue# | URL> or /harness-test-writer (prompts for a reference).

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。

Inspect a ChatGPT Apps MCP server codebase and generate chatgpt-app-submission.json with app info suggestions, tool hint justifications, test cases, and negative test cases, then report review-check findings and outputSchema warnings for submission 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。

ALWAYS USE for test work that requires changes: write, add, generate, repair, or strengthen tests for existing code in xUnit, MSTest, NUnit, pytest, Vitest/Jest, Go, or another framework. Includes regression cases, failing or flaky tests, coverage-driven additions, and audit-then-fix requests. Focused work stays direct; broad or multi-stage work invokes test-engineer. DO NOT USE for only running tests, analysis-only audits, framework/platform migrations, a test blocked on a missing production seam (testability-obstacle), or MSTest API/configuration corrections that do not design new cases (writing-mstest-tests). Within an active test-engineer pipeline, reuse supplied guidance and do not re-enter 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。

This skill should be used when establishing comprehensive QA testing processes for any software project. Use when creating test strategies, writing test cases following Google Testing Standards, executing test plans, tracking bugs with P0-P4 classification, calculating quality metrics, or generating progress reports. Includes autonomous execution capability via master prompts and complete documentation templates for third-party QA team handoffs. Implements OWASP security testing and achieves 90% coverage targets.

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 wants to create, update, or browse manual QA test cases and suites in TestDino — not execution runs. Covers list_manual_test_suites, list_manual_test_cases, get_manual_test_case, create_manual_test_case, update_manual_test_case, create_manual_test_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。