「code analysis」の検索結果

Find and remove dead code (unused files, exports, class members) using Knip as a candidate generator, then verify each candidate through AST-level analysis and interface tracing before removing anything. Use when the user asks to clean up unused code, find dead code, or reduce the codebase.

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 standalone test plan by analyzing code for test coverage gaps and edge cases. Use when you need to create, generate, or draft a test plan for a branch, need to analyze test coverage, or need to identify what tests to write for specific files or directories. Does not produce a plain-language plan for a person to run tests by hand — use manual-test-planning for that. Does not write test code — use tdd to implement behavior test-first. Does not refine existing plans — use iterative-plan-review. Does not review code quality, security, or style — use code-review for full code review. Does not evaluate architectural testability or structural coupling — use architectural-analysis for architectural assessment.

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。

Designs the contract for an API change inside one codebase — a component's props, a function surface, URL or query parameters, an event payload, or a module boundary — through a discovery pass, an options document with one recommendation, a question round, and an adversarial validation round, with every element of the contract justified from one stated goal. Use when you want to design, shape, decide, or nail down an interface, contract, signature, or API change for a capability you can already describe, sized for roughly one pull request. Produces a design document and changes no code. Does not specify what a feature should do — use plan-a-feature. Does not plan delivery or sequencing — use plan-implementation. Does not assess the architecture of existing code — use architectural-analysis. Does not write the code — use tdd. Does not restructure existing code — use refactor. Runs its rounds without pausing for review; to review each round as it lands, use pairing.

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。

Unified code intelligence — Skeleton Index (zero-dep, <4s) + AST knowledge graph (CodeGraph) + architecture diagrams (Mermaid) + smart context builder. Pre-indexes code structure so AI agents understand any codebase instantly. 95% token compression for onboarding. 30% fewer tokens for deep 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。

Master binary analysis patterns including disassembly, decompilation, control flow analysis, and code pattern recognition. Use when analyzing executables, understanding compiled code, or performing static analysis on binaries.

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。

Remove dead code, unused imports, fix lint warnings, and normalize formatting across a codebase without changing business logic or architecture. Use when lint warnings have piled up during rapid development, unused imports and variables clutter files, dead code paths were never removed, formatting is inconsistent, or static analysis tools report fixable hygiene issues.

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。

Analyze an arbitrary codebase to identify functions, APIs, and data sources suitable for exposure as MCP tools, producing a tool specification document. Use when planning an MCP server for an existing project, auditing a codebase before wrapping it as an AI-accessible tool surface, comparing what a codebase can do versus what is already exposed via MCP, or generating a tool spec to hand off to scaffold-mcp-server.

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。

Analyze codebases using a graph database instead of reading source files. Use when understanding code architecture, finding functions or call patterns, tracing data flow, checking dependencies, or answering "where is X used?" questions. Grafema builds a queryable code graph from static analysis — prefer querying the graph over reading files manually.

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。

Calculates CRAP (Change Risk Anti-Patterns) score for .NET methods, classes, or files. Use when the user asks to assess test quality, identify risky untested code, compute CRAP scores, or evaluate whether complex methods have sufficient test coverage. Requires code coverage data (Cobertura XML) and cyclomatic complexity analysis. DO NOT USE FOR: writing tests, general test execution unrelated to coverage/CRAP analysis, or general code coverage reporting without CRAP context.

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 the user wants to turn code graph analysis into tracked GitHub issues — "audit the architecture", "find god nodes", "triage architectural debt", "run graphify and log issues", "what's over-coupled in this codebase", "create issues from graphify findings", "check for structural problems", "scan for architectural smells", or any request that combines codebase topology analysis with issue tracking. This skill runs graphify to build a dependency graph, parses GRAPH_REPORT.md for god nodes and structural patterns, converts findings into GitHub issue payloads, and optionally pushes them to the repo. It bridges static analysis and project management in a single automated pass. Requires graphify and gh CLI.

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-mortem analysis of a PhysicsIntern workspace run (Claude Code, Pi, Codex, or OpenCode host). Reconstructs the trajectory from the session record — JSONL file(s) for Claude/Pi/Codex, the SQLite store for OpenCode — audits methodology adherence against the workspace's own CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md and skill/agent prompts, checks commit discipline and flag dispositions, and assesses substantive quality. Produces a thorough evidence-anchored markdown report. Use after a workspace has been worked on to identify what went well, where the methodology slipped, and what prompts to improve.

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。

Measure and audit C/C++ code size, namespace distribution, function complexity, nesting, recurrence, and namespace coupling in the EMULATORS framework. Use when Codex needs codebase statistics, complexity baselines, namespace comparisons, duplication indicators, hotspots, architectural growth analysis, or before/after complexity reports while excluding third-party code.

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。

Analyzes malicious PDF files using PDFiD, pdf-parser, and peepdf to identify embedded JavaScript, shellcode, exploits, and suspicious objects without opening the document. Determines the attack vector and extracts embedded payloads for further analysis. Activates for requests involving PDF malware analysis, malicious document analysis, PDF exploit investigation, or suspicious attachment triage.

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。

Standard Operating Procedures for read-only codebase exploration, symbol search, dependency mapping, code tracing, code review, architecture analysis, technical research, source evaluation, and evidence-based reporting.

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 working with Codeowners — cODEOWNERS file management covering ownership mapping analysis, coverage gap detection, team assignment validation, orphaned path identification, and review requirement auditing. Use when auditing code ownership across repositories, identifying unowned code paths, validating team configurations, or optimizing pull request review workflows.

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 working with Codeclimate — code Climate quality management. Covers maintainability analysis, test coverage tracking, issue detection, GPA scoring, and repository configuration. Use when managing Code Climate projects, reviewing maintainability ratings, tracking test coverage trends, or configuring analysis engines.

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。

Analyzes malicious PDF files using PDFiD, pdf-parser, and peepdf to identify embedded JavaScript, shellcode, exploits, and suspicious objects without opening the document. Determines the attack vector and extracts embedded payloads for further analysis. Activates for requests involving PDF malware analysis, malicious document analysis, PDF exploit investigation, or suspicious attachment triage.

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。

The PRIMARY development workflow for the Archon project (remote-coding-agent). Use this skill instead of any PRP skills when working on Archon code. Routes to 10 specialized cookbooks based on what the user is trying to do: RESEARCH — "how does the orchestrator work?", "where is session state defined?", "trace the workflow execution flow", "what is IWorkflowStore?" INVESTIGATE — "should we use Drizzle or Prisma?", "what's the best way to add WebSockets?", "can we migrate to Turso?", "how do other projects handle rate limiting?" PRD — "write a PRD for dark mode", "spec out the notification feature", "product requirements for webhook retry" PLAN — "plan the auth refactor", "design the caching layer", "create an implementation plan for #42" IMPLEMENT — "implement the plan", "execute .claude/archon/plans/auth.plan.md", "build the feature from the plan", "code this up" REVIEW — "review PR #123", "review my changes", "code review the diff" DEBUG — "debug the failing test", "why is streaming broken?", "root cause analysis on the timeout issue" COMMIT — "commit these changes", "commit the auth refactor" PR — "create a PR", "open a pull request for this branch" ISSUE — "report this to gh", "create a gh issue", "log it in github", "file a bug for this", "create a feature request" This skill triggers on ANY development task: researching, investigating, planning, building, reviewing, debugging, committing, or shipping code. NOT for: Running Archon CLI workflows in worktrees (use /archon instead).

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。

Analyzes malicious PDF files using PDFiD, pdf-parser, and peepdf to identify embedded JavaScript, shellcode, exploits, and suspicious objects without opening the document. Determines the attack vector and extracts embedded payloads for further analysis. Activates for requests involving PDF malware analysis, malicious document analysis, PDF exploit investigation, or suspicious attachment triage.

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 security vulnerabilities in a codebase or repository with Strix — a white-box AI security review that reads your source, reasons about the actual data flow and authorization model, then exploits what it finds in a live sandbox so every reported issue has a working proof-of-concept instead of a noisy static-analysis alert. Covers injection, XSS, SSRF, broken access control and IDOR, insecure deserialization, secrets in code, unsafe dependencies, and business-logic flaws. Use when the user asks to security-scan, security-review, or audit their code, repo, or pull request for vulnerabilities.

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 Qwen Code headlessly for repository analysis and coding tasks. Use when the user asks to delegate work to Qwen Code or obtain a Qwen-based coding-agent result.

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 MiniMax Code headlessly for repository analysis and coding tasks. Use when the user asks to delegate work to MiniMax Code or obtain a MiniMax-based coding-agent result.

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。

Deep learning for single-cell analysis using scvi-tools. This skill should be used when users need (1) data integration and batch correction with scVI/scANVI, (2) ATAC-seq analysis with PeakVI, (3) CITE-seq multi-modal analysis with totalVI, (4) multiome RNA+ATAC analysis with MultiVI, (5) spatial transcriptomics deconvolution with DestVI, (6) label transfer and reference mapping with scANVI/scArches, (7) RNA velocity with veloVI, or (8) any deep learning-based single-cell method. Triggers include mentions of scVI, scANVI, totalVI, PeakVI, MultiVI, DestVI, veloVI, sysVI, scArches, variational autoencoder, VAE, batch correction, data integration, multi-modal, CITE-seq, multiome, reference mapping, latent space.

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。

Analyze git repositories to build a security ownership topology (people-to-file), compute bus factor and sensitive-code ownership, and export CSV/JSON for graph databases and visualization. Trigger only when the user explicitly wants a security-oriented ownership or bus-factor analysis grounded in git history (for example: orphaned sensitive code, security maintainers, CODEOWNERS reality checks for risk, sensitive hotspots, or ownership clusters). Do not trigger for general maintainer lists or non-security ownership questions.

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。