Results for “data-quality”

Create publication-quality static, animated, and interactive plots with fine-grained control over every element, from basic charts to multi-panel figures, with export to PNG, PDF, and SVG.

Systematically QA test a web application and fix bugs found. Runs QA testing, then iteratively fixes bugs in source code, committing each fix atomically and re-verifying. Use when asked to "qa", "QA", "test this site", "find bugs", "test and fix", or "fix what's broken". Proactively suggest when the user says a feature is ready for testing or asks "does this work?". Three tiers: Quick (critical/high only), Standard (+ medium), Exhaustive (+ cosmetic). Produces before/after health scores, fix evidence, and a ship-readiness summary. For report-only mode, use /qa-only. (gstack) Voice triggers (speech-to-text aliases): "quality check", "test the app", "run QA".

Comprehensive exploratory data analysis with publication-quality descriptive tables, correlation matrices, distribution plots, and assumption testing. Generates a standalone EDA report with Table 1 (gtsummary/great_tables), correlation heatmap, distribution diagnostics, VIF for multicollinearity, and normality/homoscedasticity tests. All figures are APA-formatted and colorblind-safe. Use when the user says "exploratory analysis," "EDA," "descriptive statistics," "explore the data," "Table 1," "correlations," "distributions," or when /data-clean completes successfully. Triggers on "EDA," "descriptive," "Table 1," "explore," "correlations."

Performs deep architectural analysis of a specified module, directory, or feature area by examining structural coupling, data flow, concurrency patterns, risk, and SOLID alignment. Use when the user wants to assess, evaluate, or review the architecture, design quality, dependency structure, coupling, cohesion, or technical debt of an existing part of the codebase. Not for investigating specific bugs, runtime errors, or failures — use investigate. Not for test planning — use automated-test-planning. Not for file-level code review — use code-review. Not for researching open-ended options, prior art, or how something works — use research. Not for designing a new interface or contract — use design-an-api. Not for writing documentation or architectural decision records.