1,922 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
[omh] Hidden or swallowed errors suspected: find swallowed errors, unsafe fallbacks, hidden UI/runtime failures, and missing propagation before they become false green status. Use when the user says: failure-signal-audit, failure signal audit, silent failure, silent failures, silent failure hunter, swallowed error, swallowed errors, empty catch.
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。
[omh] Build or CI failure to triage: classify build, typecheck, lint, test, CI, and DCO failures into minimal safe fix handoffs. Use when the user says: build-failure-triage, build failure triage, build failure, build-failure, build fix, build failed, build failing, compile error.
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。
Debug Azure production issues on Azure using AppLens, Azure Monitor, resource health, and safe triage. WHEN: debug production issues, troubleshoot app service, app service high CPU, app service deployment failure, troubleshoot container apps, container app 503 or target port mismatch, troubleshoot functions, function telemetry missing or stopped after a config/connection-string change, troubleshoot AKS, VM RDP, Linux SSH, VM black screen, can't connect to VM, reset VM password, NSG or firewall blocking, kubectl cannot connect, kube-system/CoreDNS failures, pod pending, crashloop, node not ready, upgrade failures, analyze logs, KQL, insights, image pull failures, cold start issues, health probe failures, resource health, root cause of errors, troubleshoot event hubs, troubleshoot service bus, messaging SDK error, AMQP connection failure, message lock lost, lock renewal during long-running processing, service bus dead letter.
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。
Debug Azure production issues on Azure using AppLens, Azure Monitor, resource health, and safe triage. WHEN: debug production issues, troubleshoot app service, app service high CPU, app service deployment failure, troubleshoot container apps, container app 503 or target port mismatch, troubleshoot functions, function telemetry missing or stopped after a config/connection-string change, troubleshoot AKS, VM RDP, Linux SSH, VM black screen, can't connect to VM, reset VM password, NSG or firewall blocking, kubectl cannot connect, kube-system/CoreDNS failures, pod pending, crashloop, node not ready, upgrade failures, analyze logs, KQL, insights, image pull failures, cold start issues, health probe failures, resource health, root cause of errors, troubleshoot event hubs, troubleshoot service bus, messaging SDK error, AMQP connection failure, message lock lost, lock renewal during long-running processing, service bus dead letter.
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。
ソフトウェアにおける非正常状態（Error, Defect, Fault, Failure）の分類と定義を提供する。 JIS規格・JSTQB・Bertrand Meyer等の複数の標準に基づき、各概念の違いを明確化し、 適切なエラー設計・障害対策の判断を支援する。エラー設計、障害分析、コードレビュー、 テスト設計時に用語の混乱を防ぎ、正確な分類に基づく対処戦略の選択に使用。 対象言語: 言語非依存。 トリガー：「ErrorとFaultの違い」「DefectとBugの関係」「障害と故障の区別」 「エラーの分類」「Failureとは何か」「非正常状態の設計」「エラー用語の定義」 「エラーと欠陥の違い」「faultとfailureの違い」 といったエラー分類・用語定義関連リクエストで起動。
Performs root cause analysis on DAG execution failures. Traces failure propagation, identifies systemic issues, and generates actionable remediation guidance. Activate on 'failure analysis', 'root cause', 'why did it fail', 'debug failure', 'error investigation'. NOT for execution tracing (use dag-execution-tracer) or performance issues (use dag-performance-profiler).
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。
Test an application against the OWASP Top 10 with Strix — autonomous AI agents that attempt real exploits for each category of the current OWASP Top 10:2025 (broken access control including SSRF, security misconfiguration, software supply chain failures, cryptographic failures, injection, insecure design, authentication failures, integrity failures, logging and alerting failures, mishandling of exceptional conditions) and report only what they could actually prove, mapped back to the category with a proof-of-concept. Also covers the OWASP API Security Top 10 (2023). Use when the user asks for an OWASP Top 10 assessment, OWASP compliance testing, or a security review mapped to OWASP categories.
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。
[omh] Failing run handed to Jev for a next move: Jev failure triage: retry, fix a dependency, ask for access, or change approach on a failing run. Use when the user says: jev-failure-triage, jev failure triage, ask jev if this failure is transient.
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 workflow for auditing ML CI failures, experiment regressions, training run failures, golden metric failures, and telemetry-backed ML work-product claims from local repositories, logs, metrics, configs, and artifacts. Use when Codex needs to decide whether an ML failure is a model/convergence issue, correctness bug, data/config issue, infrastructure/runtime issue, evaluation/gating policy issue, or unsupported claim, and produce structured evidence-backed outputs.
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 running existing project validation commands and fixing failures after code changes, including lint, type-check, unit/integration test, build, CI, or local script failures. Do not use when the task is to design or author new component/E2E tests; Chinese triggers include validation, check failures, fix failures, CI failures.
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 NASA Fault Management Handbook (NASA-HDBK-1002, Draft 2, April 2012). Use for the systems-engineering discipline of designing what a system does when it fails — the fault/failure/anomaly vocabulary, the five FM strategies (two prevention strategies — design-time fault avoidance and operational failure avoidance — plus three tolerance strategies — failure masking, failure recovery, and goal change), the six FM process activities across NASA mission phases Pre-A to E, response-latency-versus-time-to-criticality (TTC) design trades, fault/failure containment regions and FEPPs, the four redundancy approaches, top-down FM requirements development, FM verification vs. validation, the seven dedicated FM milestone reviews (FMCR/FMARR/FMPDR/FMCDR/FMTRR/FMLRR/FMCERR), FM organizational structure, and mined NASA Lessons Learned. Space-mission oriented (flight/ground/operations); spacecraft examples throughout. IMPORTANT: built from an UNAPPROVED DRAFT — several sections (detailed architecture building blocks, the Assessment & Analysis guidance, and Operations & Maintenance) are placeholders in the source and are thin here. Thin on detailed FDIR algorithms, terrestrial/IT fault management, and any approved-standard terminology that may have changed since Draft 2.
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。
TypeScript、Python、Goのエラー処理を設計・見直すスキル。エラーの分類、再試行、APIの応答、利用者向けの案内文を整理します。
Judge whether a market FAILED to react to news favorable to a crowded speculative position — step 2 of Jason Shapiro's COT contrarian process. Consumes a cot-contrarian-detector report (or an explicit direction) plus a Claude-curated events JSON, fetches the underlying price series with a documented fallback chain, and produces a fail-closed CONFIRMED / NOT_CONFIRMED / INSUFFICIENT_EVIDENCE verdict using a statistically validated drift-significance test (not a naive failure-ratio, which false-confirms on pure noise). Generic beyond COT — reusable for PEAD and macro-crowding news-failure checks. Use when the user asks to check news-failure confirmation, whether a crowded market "shrugged off" good/bad news, or wants to run Shapiro step 2 on a CROWDED_LONG/CROWDED_SHORT market.
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。
Diagnose NCCL failures and adjacent training-pod failures on HyperPod GPU clusters (EKS or Slurm) — training hangs, AllReduce / collective-op timeouts, EFA or libfabric errors, rendezvous failures, EFA TCP fallback, /dev/shm or memlock issues, NCCL version mismatch across pods, container OOM / exit-137 / OOMKilled, GPU OOM (CUDA out of memory), CrashLoopBackOff / Pending pods, MASTER_ADDR DNS, NetworkPolicy blocking. Not for single-node hardware faults (→ hyperpod-node-debugger § G) or cluster-creation EFA / SSM failures (→ hyperpod-cluster-debugger § A / § F).
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。
Prospective failure analysis using Gary Klein's pre-mortem technique. Assumes complete failure, works backward to identify risks, leading indicators, and circuit breakers. Counters optimism bias by forcing systematic exploration of failure modes before they materialize. Use for project plans, architecture decisions, technology adoption, business strategy, or feature launches. Triggers on "리스크", "위험", "실패하면", "swing-mortem", "뭐가 잘못될 수 있어", "risk", "what could go wrong", "걱정되는 점", "failure modes", "리스크 분석", "위험 분석".
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。
Investigate Azure incidents and service degradations with a read-only workflow using Azure CLI, Resource Health, Activity Log, metrics, resource logs, and official Microsoft docs. Use when troubleshooting Azure outages, Resource Health alerts, Azure Firewall or DNS failures, ExpressRoute or BGP instability, VM availability problems, AKS incidents, App Service failures, database connectivity issues, Entra ID sign-in problems, load balancer issues, platform-vs-workload cutover, or drafting a troubleshooting report. Triggers on 'Azure トラブルシューティング', '障害調査', '切り分け', 'Resource Health', '復旧確認', 'Azure Firewall', 'DNS', 'ExpressRoute', 'VPN Gateway', 'BGP', 'AKS', 'App Service', 'SQL', 'PostgreSQL', 'Cosmos DB', 'Entra ID', 'incident', 'degraded', 'unavailable'.
Runbook skill for failures: cron error, PA failure, cascade, gateway disconnect, semantic DB stale. Walks: detect → classify → diagnose → notify → log. Replaces ad-hoc failure handling. Triggers: "cron failed", "X is broken", "cascade", "incident", "gateway down", "PA failure".
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。
やりたいことを1行で言うと、B 型 loop engineering の 7 要素 (context / feedback / verification gate / termination / error handling / state / cost guard) を埋めた loop spec をコピペ可能な形で生成する。生成した spec は現行 Claude Code の実行プリミティブ (Workflow ツール / /loop skill / ralph-loop plugin / claude -p) に落とせる骨格になる (旧 `claude --goal` は廃止)。10 件 failure mode (F1-F10) の対策フックも自動挿入。Hybrid モード: 1 行入力 → デフォルト埋めで一発出力 → 「ここを調整したい」場所だけ短く聞き直す。Use when ユーザーが「loop を作りたい / loop-design / 自走ループ書いて / Workflow 用の spec 作って / 7 要素埋めて / verification gate ありで」と言ったとき、または `/loop-design` を実行したとき。Loop engineering の理論背景は Cards/loop-engineering-autonomous-agents、失敗モード対策は Cards/loop-failure-modes-mechanism-2026 を参照。
OpenClawのGatewayや設定、認証情報の参照、チャネル、ポートの不具合を読み取り専用の確認で調べ、根拠付きの診断結果と次の対応を整理するスキル。
リポジトリの状態確認、コマンド実行、CIやビルドの失敗調査を進め、必要な修正を検証します。ローカル変更・コミット・pushの状況を実行結果の根拠とともに報告します。
Playwrightでブラウザ操作を再現するテストを作り、画面ごとの操作整理や自動実行を支援します。時々失敗するテストの調査と、画像・動画・実行記録の保存も扱います。
AIエージェントの失敗や同じ操作の繰り返しを記録し、原因の切り分け、小さな復旧操作、結果の報告まで進める手順を示して、根拠のある再試行につなげるスキル。
AIエージェントの不調を、指示・記憶・ツール実行・画面表示など12の層から調べるスキル。コードやログを根拠に原因を整理し、重要度順の指摘と修正案をまとめます。
Babysit a GitHub pull request after creation by continuously polling review comments, CI checks/workflow runs, and mergeability state until the PR is merged/closed or user help is required. Diagnose failures, retry likely flaky failures up to 3 times, auto-fix/push branch-related issues when appropriate, and keep watching open PRs so fresh review feedback is surfaced promptly. Use when the user asks Codex to monitor a PR, watch CI, handle review comments, or keep an eye on failures and feedback on an open 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。