テスト・セキュリティのスキル

QA the omo Codex Light edition (lazycodex / packages/omo-codex) itself, in strict isolation so ONLY our plugin is exercised, never the user's real ~/.codex. The first-party method drives the real `codex app-server` against an isolated CODEX_HOME plus a LOCAL mock model (no real API call), and proves a plugin hook fired by asserting hook/started + hook/completed notifications. Also: isolated install verification, per-component hook probes, a tmux TUI smoke, and runtime log observation (RUST_LOG / logs SQLite / /debug-config). Ships tested helper scripts each with a --self-test. Use whenever someone changes anything under packages/omo-codex or wants to QA, smoke-test, verify, or debug the Codex plugin, its hooks/components, the installer/config.toml, the app-server flow, or the Codex TUI. Triggers: codex qa, qa codex, codex-qa, test codex plugin, verify codex hook, codex app-server, lazycodex qa, isolated CODEX_HOME, prove codex hook fired, codex tui test.

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。

QA opencode itself, per case: verify the CLI/terminal (opencode run, db, serve, export), prove a specific plugin hook/action/event fired via the SSE event stream, smoke-test the TUI under tmux, and investigate sessions in opencode's SQLite DB by id, title/name, or message text. Ships tested helper scripts (each with a --self-test) plus per-domain references. Use whenever someone wants to QA, smoke-test, verify, or debug opencode's CLI, HTTP server, plugin hooks/events, or TUI, or to find/inspect opencode sessions in the database. Triggers: opencode qa, qa opencode, test opencode, verify opencode hook, opencode session db, find opencode session by id/name/text, opencode tui test, opencode server health, opencode event stream.

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。

Thorough, file-cited technical debt audit across 9 dimensions using AST-grep (tree-sitter), grep, LSP, and language-native tooling. Produces TECH_DEBT_AUDIT.md with severity, effort estimates, and prioritized fixes. Use when asked for codebase health check, tech debt audit, architecture review, code quality assessment, or cleanup planning. Triggers: 'tech debt', 'technical debt', 'debt audit', 'code health', 'technical debt audit', 'codebase health check', 'find tech debt', 'debt analysis', 'audit code 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。

Runs rigorous visual QA across web, terminal, and paginated surfaces: an Apple HIG-based checklist, paired light/dark captures at phone and desktop widths, screenshot evidence, and a per-item PASS/FAIL verdict. Use for any UI build or change, or when asked whether a page, component, or TUI looks right or follows the platform's design guidelines.

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。

Post-implementation gate review: run manual QA on the real surface yourself, then launch ONE gate reviewer (never a panel) to audit goal, constraints, code quality, security, missed context, and QA evidence. Use before a PR handoff or when the user explicitly asks to review completed work.

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 an artifact before delivering it - file deliverables (pdf, pptx, docx, xlsx, csv) and web artifacts alike. Use whenever a build is about to return a link, or a build task asks for validation, QA, or a visual check. Covers the per-kind gate scripts, render-and-look verification, and leftover-placeholder scanning.

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。

For use only in threads for this proactive personal assistant. Investigate software issues; inspect, write, review, or test code; work on a repository or local engineering file; or create, fix, or monitor a pull request or CI run. Use for actual engineering or product QA work, not a general programming explanation.

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 the body before the first implementation edit for a bug fix or behavior change, or when the user or governing specification makes reusable tests a deliverable. It keeps the smallest focused test with the delivered project and updates coverage when behavior changes. Do not load for greenfield work unless reusable tests are explicitly required, behavior-preserving refactors, verification-only work, plan/review/explanation/documentation/formatting/generated-output-only work, explicit no-change or no-tool work, or when the user declines 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。

Keep a Markdown table readable in a narrow terminal of about 100 display columns - a wide table or one carrying prose in its cells wraps into unreadable ragged rows. Always call read_skill for bundled:table-fit before emitting a Markdown table in a final answer, and load it as soon as the answer starts forming as a comparison, a mapping, a feature matrix, a pros-and-cons, an options rundown, or a per-item summary across several dimensions. Do not load it for a table already inside a file being edited, for code, data, or test fixtures that merely look tabular, for tables the user pasted for you to read, or for an answer with no table and no tabular shape forming.

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。

Deliver a runnable local browser app so the user can operate it on the first handoff. This delivery skill does not choose whether a requested local system should be a browser app. On a current turn that explicitly says to implement a brand-new browser project now, load bundled:greenfield-project-scaffolding before project work only after no-peek or permitted top-level placement facts prove that no named or suitable current-folder target resolves the root; never hand off from planning or answer-only turns, existing work, a named or suitable target, or standalone or single-file delivery. Resolve user-blocking product or interface choices with an available interaction surface; resolving those choices alone never authorizes implementation. Always call read_skill for bundled:browser-app-delivery before creating or materially changing a local browser app that owns its start path or a playable browser game. Also load it when the user requests a paste-ready, single-file, offline, or immediately playable browser artifact, even if no local start path should remain, unless the user says they will open or check it themselves or explicitly declines verification. On completed local-server delivery, include exact start commands, a concrete local URL, and explicit browser-open wording. On completed standalone delivery, hand off the exact artifact path or paste URL and smoke result without inventing a server. Do not load it for a self-contained static file that has no owned start path if the user either says they will open or check it themselves or explicitly declines verification. Do not load it for component/style-only edits, deployed sites, backend/API-only work, browser QA, review, explanation, plan-only, or explicit stop/no-tool turns.

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。

Health-check the user's Claude Code setup and fix issues: diagnose installation health — what the `claude doctor` terminal diagnostics cover — from local data (duplicate or leftover installs, PATH, unparseable settings files, broken or colliding agent definitions, skills whose frontmatter fails to parse); find unused skills, MCP servers, and plugins versus their context cost and disable dead weight; deduplicate local CLAUDE.md files against checked-in ones; trim checked-in CLAUDE.md files by cutting content a session could derive from the codebase (directory layouts, tech-stack lists, architecture overviews) while keeping gotchas, rationale, and non-standard conventions; migrate always-loaded CLAUDE.md guidance into lazy skills and nested CLAUDE.md files; flag slow hooks and context-heavy extensions; check the installed version is current; make auto mode the default permission mode; and pre-approve frequently denied read-only commands. Use when the user asks for a doctor run, checkup, audit, tune-up, or cleanup of their Claude Code setup or configuration.

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 new skills, modify and improve existing skills, and measure skill performance. Use when users want to create a skill from scratch, edit, or optimize an existing skill, run evals to test a skill, benchmark skill performance with variance analysis, or optimize a skill's description for better triggering accuracy.

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。

Creating and developing startup hooks for Claude Code on the web. Use when the user wants to set up a repository for Claude Code on the web, create a SessionStart hook to ensure their project can run tests and linters during web sessions.

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。

Complete a security review of the pending changes on the current branch

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 that a code change actually does what it's supposed to by exercising it end-to-end and observing behavior — drive the affected flow, not just tests or typecheck. Run before committing nontrivial changes; bootstraps this repo's project verify skill if none exists yet. Don't invoke it on a diff that only touches tests, docs, or other code with no runtime surface to drive (a change to product source always has one) — there's nothing to observe.

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。

Launch and drive this project's app to see a change working. Use when asked to run, start, or screenshot the app, or to confirm a change works in the real app (not just tests). First looks for a project skill that already covers launching the app; otherwise falls back to built-in patterns per project type (CLI, server, TUI, Electron, browser-driven, library).

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 authoring 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。

Verify your work by actually operating the app or website you changed, instead of assuming it works. Strongly recommended whenever you build, modify, or debug a web app, website, or desktop GUI app. Drive real browsers with the agent-browser CLI and native desktop apps with the cua-driver CLI. These are installed on demand through the host's normal command-approval flow.

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。

Guide for testing Codex TUI interactively

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。

Testing against remote executors in integration 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。

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。

Application security testing (AppSec) across a whole product with Strix — decide which asset needs which test (source code, running web app, API, CI pipeline), run it, and turn the results into a ranked remediation plan. Autonomous agents exploit and prove each issue instead of emitting static-analysis alerts, so the plan is ordered by what is actually reachable. Use when the user asks for an application security review or audit, an appsec assessment, vulnerability scanning across their stack, a security review before a launch or a customer security questionnaire, or does not yet know which kind of security test they need.

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。

Fix security vulnerabilities found by a Strix pentest (open-source CLI or app.strix.ai cloud) — triage by severity, patch the root cause rather than the symptom, and re-run Strix to prove each fix actually closes the exploit. Handles injection, XSS, SSRF, broken access control, IDOR, and other validated findings. Use after a Strix scan reports findings, or when the user asks to remediate, patch, or fix security issues from a strix_runs report, vulnerabilities.json, findings.sarif, or a cloud scan.

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-test a REST, GraphQL, or gRPC API with Strix — autonomous agents that enumerate endpoints from an OpenAPI/GraphQL schema (or by crawling), then actually exploit the API-specific vulnerability classes in the OWASP API Security Top 10 (2023) — broken object-level authorization (BOLA/IDOR), broken object property level authorization (excessive data exposure and mass assignment), broken function-level authorization, unrestricted resource consumption, SSRF, injection, and auth/token flaws. Every finding comes with a working proof-of-concept request. Use when the user asks to pentest, security-test, audit, or find vulnerabilities in an API, endpoint, or backend service.

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。