「implementation」の検索結果

Create a new implementation plan file for new features, refactoring existing code or upgrading packages, design, architecture or infrastructure.

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 GitHub Issues from implementation plan phases using feature_request.yml or chore_request.yml templates.

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。

Prompt for creating detailed feature implementation plans, following Epoch monorepo structure.

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。

Creates detailed, sectionized implementation plans through research, stakeholder interviews, and multi-LLM review. Use when planning features that need thorough pre-implementation 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。

Review completed implementation changes before final verification. Use when repository policy requires independent review or the user explicitly requests it.

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。

Carry implementation through an isolated worktree and local handoff. Use only when this skill is explicitly invoked.

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 implementation matches change artifacts. Use when the user wants to validate that implementation is complete, correct, and coherent before archiving.

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。

Set up, audit, and debug analytics tracking implementation — GA4, Google Tag Manager, event taxonomy, conversion tracking, and data quality. Use when building a tracking plan from scratch, auditing existing analytics for gaps or errors, debugging missing events, or setting up GTM. Trigger keywords: GA4 setup, Google Tag Manager, GTM, event tracking, analytics implementation, conversion tracking, tracking plan, event taxonomy, custom dimensions, UTM tracking, analytics audit, missing events, tracking broken. NOT for analyzing marketing campaign data — use campaign-analytics for that. NOT for BI dashboards — use product-analytics for in-product event 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。

Turn Notion specs into implementation plans, tasks, and progress tracking; use when implementing PRDs/feature specs and creating Notion plans + tasks from them.

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。

Implement, fix, refactor, or remove repository code under required scope, non-regression, verification, and review gates. Use whenever a task may change a production, test, script, or other implementation artifact, including build logic, generated source, and behavior-affecting configuration. Also use it alongside a specialized code-changing Skill. Do not use for read-only analysis or review, diagnosis-only work, or prose-only changes.

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 building or editing any visual surface in apps/web — a page, screen, list, card, badge, avatar, modal, form, empty state, toast, tooltip, table, or panel — and you need to know WHICH component to compose and which primitives are banned. Load kortix-brand first for the values (color, spacing, type, radius, motion budget); this file assumes those and covers components, layout shells, and reference implementations. Source of truth: src/components/ui, the live /design-system page, and the reference implementations listed inside.

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。

Turn Notion specs into implementation plans, tasks, and progress tracking; use when implementing PRDs/feature specs and creating Notion plans + tasks from them.

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。

Audit a datafusion-spark function implementation for correctness against Apache Spark 4.2.0. Studies the Spark source across versions, reviews the Rust implementation and its signature, verifies expected values against a real PySpark, fixes divergences, and captures the rest as issues and disabled 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。

Measures timing side channels in cryptographic implementations by running them, using dudect for statistical analysis and Timecop over Valgrind for dynamic tracing. Covers the formal, symbolic, dynamic, and statistical tool categories and how to read a result. Use when testing whether a running implementation is constant-time, measuring timing variance on a compiled binary, or investigating a suspected timing attack. Not for statically inspecting compiler output — the constant-time-analysis plugin covers that.

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。

Mutation-driven test vector generation. Finds implementations of a cryptographic algorithm or protocol, runs mutation testing to identify escaped mutants, then generates new test vectors that deliberately exercise the uncovered code paths. Compares before/after mutation kill rates to prove vector effectiveness. Use when generating cryptographic test vectors, measuring Wycheproof coverage gaps, finding escaped mutants via mutation testing, creating cross-implementation test suites, or improving test vector coverage for crypto primitives.

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。

Systematic methodology for identifying and exploiting cryptographic implementation weaknesses in real-world applications. Covers padding oracle attacks against CBC-mode ciphers with PKCS7 padding (Vaudenay's original attack through modern padbuster automation), ECB mode exploitation including block cut-and-paste and byte-at-a-time decryption, hash length extension attacks against SHA1/SHA256/MD5-based MACs using HashPump, RSA vulnerabilities including small public exponent, common modulus, Bleichenbacher PKCS1v1.5 padding oracle, and Coppersmith's method for partial key recovery. Addresses weak PRNG exploitation targeting time-seeded generators and Mersenne Twister MT19937 state recovery from observed outputs, timing side-channel attacks against comparison operations, nonce reuse in AES-GCM leading to authentication key recovery, and key derivation weaknesses including insufficient iteration counts and missing salts. Primary tooling includes padbuster, RsaCtfTool, hashpump, and PyCryptodome for building custom exploit payloads. Maps to CWE-327 (Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm), CWE-328 (Use of Weak Hash), and CWE-330 (Use of Insufficiently Random Values). Emphasizes black-box identification of vulnerable implementations before transitioning to targeted exploitation.

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。

Turn Notion specs into implementation plans, tasks, and progress tracking; use when implementing PRDs/feature specs and creating Notion plans + tasks from them.

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 the Figma MCP server to fetch design context, screenshots, variables, and assets from Figma, and to translate Figma nodes into production code. Use when a task involves Figma URLs, node IDs, design-to-code implementation, or Figma MCP setup and troubleshooting. Covers general Figma data fetching and exploration. Do NOT use when the goal is specifically pixel-perfect code implementation from a Figma design (use figma-implement-design 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。

Feature planning and implementation with 4 adaptive phases (Specify, Design, Tasks, Execute). Auto-sizes depth by complexity. Writes testable requirements in EARS notation, atomic tasks, atomic Conventional Commits, and requirement traceability. Ships deterministic Python validation scripts so structural gates are enforced by code, not memory. Features an independent Verifier (author != verifier, evidence-or-zero), a discrimination sensor, a decision log (STATE.md), a test-coverage matrix, and a self-improving lessons layer. Stack-agnostic and tool-agnostic. Use when (1) planning features, (2) implementing with verification and atomic commits, (3) validating an implementation against a spec. Triggers on "specify feature", "discuss feature", "design", "tasks", "implement", "validate", "verify work", "UAT", "record decision", "pause work", "resume work". Do NOT use for pure architecture decomposition analysis or standalone technical design documents.

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。

Guides design and implementation of evolutionary modular-monolith platforms with DDD (strategic + tactical), flat-by-aggregate organization, an Anti-Corruption Layer for vendor independence, a transactional outbox for events, smart resilience (backoff with jitter, circuit breakers, idempotency), and a polished architecture HTML document with elegant SVG diagrams. Use when designing a platform or backend, defining bounded contexts, organizing modules and folders, choosing monolith vs microservices, decoupling from an external service (ERP, storage, AI), making calls resilient, adding real-time push, picking a 2026 TypeScript stack (Nx, NestJS, React), or producing an architecture document or diagram. Also triggers on 'modular monolith', 'bounded contexts', 'flat-by-aggregate', 'ports and adapters', 'architecture diagram'. Do NOT use for simple CRUD, NestJS-only deep implementation (use nestjs-modular-monolith), or pure domain-model review (use tactical-ddd).

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。

Mandatory iPolloWork code-change gate for modern, minimal, performant, reuse-first implementation and clean repository ownership. Use whenever AI creates, edits, deletes, or refactors application code, server code, packages, scripts, tests, dependencies, schemas, routes, UI, or generated-file workflows. Reuse existing code before creating files, keep one source of truth, prevent parallel implementations and junk directories, justify every new file or dependency, and audit the current change before completion.

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 only when a developer explicitly asks to clean, prune, tidy, or organize DeepChat SDD documentation after implementation and validation. Scans docs/features, docs/issues, and docs/architecture; prefers multi-agent review when available; removes completed issue docs when a linked GitHub issue is closed or implementation and validation evidence proves the bug no longer exists, drops stale plans and legacy task files from completed feature or architecture goals, and deletes obsolete feature or architecture docs.

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 implementation matches change artifacts. Use when the user wants to validate that implementation is complete, correct, and coherent before archiving.

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。

Run the Nexent requirement or bug lifecycle from SPEC analysis through feature catalog and D1-D5 case design, product implementation, fixed test implementation, local verification, and delivery evidence. Use for features, fixes, refactors, APIs, UI, and model or Agent runtime changes.

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。