「codebase analysis」の検索結果

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。

Generates MkDocs-flavored or standard GitHub-flavored Markdown documentation from codebase analysis findings including API references, architecture guides, standalone markdown files, and change summaries (converted from agent)

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。

Explores codebases to find relevant files, trace execution paths, and map architecture with team communication capabilities for collaborative analysis (converted from agent)

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 use Google Gemini for analysis, large files or codebases, sandbox execution, or brainstorming. Uses headless Gemini CLI scripts (no MCP). Triggers on "use Gemini", "analyze with Gemini", "large file", "sandbox", "brainstorm with Gemini".

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。

Four-stage alchemical code transmutation — nigredo (decomposition), albedo (purification), citrinitas (illumination), rubedo (synthesis) — with meditate and heal checkpoints between stages. Transforms tangled or legacy code into optimized, well-structured output through systematic material analysis. Use when transforming legacy code into modern equivalents, refactoring deeply tangled modules where incremental fixes keep failing, converting a codebase between paradigms, or when simpler refactoring approaches have stalled and a full-cycle transformation is needed.

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。

Validate Python code quality with formatting, type checking, linting, and security analysis. Use for Python codebases to ensure PEP 8 compliance, type safety, and 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。

Validate TypeScript/JavaScript code quality with ESLint, Prettier, type checking, and security analysis. Use for TypeScript/JS codebases to ensure code quality and standards.

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。

Validate Rust code quality with rustfmt, clippy, cargo check, and security analysis. Use for Rust codebases to ensure idiomatic Rust code and best practices.

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。

Full ASVS 5.0 compliance assessment against a codebase and/or architecture diagrams. Reads all 346 controls from the companion CSV, performs targeted code analysis per control, and produces a complete matrix marked COMPLIANT / NON_COMPLIANT / NOT_RELEVANT — with per-control reasoning and evidence (code snippets, file:line references, diagram observations). Outputs a reviewed CSV matrix and a self-contained HTML evidence report.

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。

White-box source code security review structured around OWASP ASVS 5.0 (427 verification requirements across 16 chapters). Reads and understands application source code to build a security-aware knowledge base that enriches all downstream skills. Covers: tech stack identification, route/endpoint mapping, authentication and authorization architecture, dangerous function patterns, source-to-sink data flow tracing, IaC review, dependency analysis, ASVS compliance mapping, and LLM integration security (prompt injection, tool abuse, output handling, RAG poisoning, MCP server patterns). When LLM/AI framework usage is detected, automatically reviews OWASP LLM Top 10 patterns from source code and chains into /ai-redteam with white-box context for live endpoint testing. Chains into /pentester, /threat-modeling, /web-exploit, /api-security, /cloud-security, /analyze-cve, /credential-audit, and /ai-redteam — providing white-box context that transforms black-box testing into targeted, informed 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。

Synthesize project documentation and codebase into comprehensive roadmap status, gaps analysis, and blockers. Use when assessing project health, identifying blockers, tracking progress, comparing plan vs reality, documenting risks, or planning next milestones. Triggers: "roadmap", "project status", "blockers", "risks", "progress", "next milestone", "gaps", "what's done".

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 code-review or security-review findings for false positives using deep codebase tracing, framework-aware analysis, and web research. Produces a .verified.md report alongside the original. Use when a review report has been generated and needs independent verification, or when user runs /verify-findings, mentions "verify review", "check false positives", or "validate findings".

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 codebase for product-market fit readiness -- evaluate startup PMF signals, core value loop tightness, feature scatter vs focus ratio, user activation funnel friction, retention hook infrastructure, pricing flexibility, analytics event coverage, CI/CD iteration speed, and growth-stage maturity for pre-seed through Series A products.

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 infrastructure costs at 1K-100K user scales by reading the actual codebase, auto-detecting cloud providers, modeling per-action costs, and projecting total monthly spend with optimization recommendations.

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。

Architectural review workflow. Analyzes codebase organization via noun analysis and produces a target blueprint. Advisory only — does not implement changes. Always offers to cut tickets for the planned work; orchestrators receive the proposal and apply their own autonomy judgment to approve / edit / decline.

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。

Proactive bug-hunting workflow. Assesses codebase risk through complexity, coverage, and structural analysis, then spawns focused investigators that write reproducing tests to validate suspected bugs. Thoroughness over speed. Advisory only — produces findings and proposes tickets; does not implement fixes.

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。

Strategic planning consultant that produces decision-complete work plans through Socratic interview, codebase exploration, Metis gap analysis, and optional Momus high-accuracy review. MUST USE when the task has 5+ steps, scope is ambiguous, multiple modules are involved, or the user asks for a plan. Triggers: plan this, create a work plan, interview me, start planning, prometheustic, plan mode, help me plan this, break this down.

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。

Dr. Kaia Chen - AI Architect, mentor, and strategic advisor for Marcus. Use when the user says "Kaia", "Dr. Chen", "ask Kaia", "/kaia", or wants architectural advice, trade-off analysis, production readiness guidance, mentorship, a voice of reason, or a second opinion on design decisions. Kaia grounds her advice in the actual codebase (via Chen MCP tools) and research literature, and logs important decisions and insights via Simon.

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 initial docs/ from codebase analysis when a project has none. Triggers on 'init docs', 'create/generate documentation'. NOT for updating existing docs (mk:document-release).

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。

Pack an EXTERNAL repository into a single AI-friendly file (markdown/xml/json). Use for third-party library analysis, security audits, or handoff to external LLMs. Do NOT use to pack the current project for inbound context — the host runtime already reads files lazily. Triggers: 'pack this repo', 'snapshot of X', 'export codebase', 'repomix'.

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 structured multi-file implementation plans before build. Scope-aware: trivial tasks exit early, simple tasks get fast plans, complex tasks get full research + phase files + validation. Enforces Gate 1. Activated by /mk:plan or /mk:cook. NOT for ticket complexity analysis against an existing codebase (see mk:planning-engine); NOT for CEO-level scope review of existing plans (see mk:plan-ceo-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。

Use when packaging a codebase to a single AI-friendly file for LLM analysis — local or remote, XML/Markdown/JSON, token counting, gitignore filtering, peer-side `repomix` 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。

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。

Master systematic debugging techniques, profiling tools, and root cause analysis to efficiently track down bugs across any codebase or technology stack. Use when investigating bugs, performance issues, or unexpected behavior.

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。