Results for “go”

Verify a GitHub pull request against a Jira issue's goals, requirements, and acceptance criteria, then post a PR comment with the findings. Use when a user asks Codex or MoonMind to compare a PR to a Jira story/task/bug, confirm whether a PR satisfies Jira requirements, audit implementation coverage from Jira, or publish a Jira-vs-PR verification summary.

Guides organizations through implementing zero trust architecture in cloud environments following NIST SP 800-207 and Google BeyondCorp principles, covering identity-centric access controls, micro-segmentation, continuous verification, device trust assessment, and deploying Identity-Aware Proxy in AWS, Azure, and GCP.

Measure pleasur.ai's AI-citation share across ChatGPT / Perplexity / Gemini / Google AI Overviews for the tracked query list, using SemRush (data API for AIO-presence screening + AI Toolkit via browser for share-of-voice / mention + citation gaps) and direct engine queries. Scores each query into the GEO ledger and surfaces the highest-leverage gaps to fix. The GEO Lead's core measurement loop.

Drafts HIPAA/HITECH-compliant Business Associate Agreements governing PHI/ePHI handling between covered entities and business associates. Covers Privacy Rule and Security Rule obligations, breach notification, subcontractor flow-downs, individual-rights support, and state-law overlays. Use when drafting or updating a BAA, negotiating vendor PHI access, or attaching HIPAA terms to a services agreement. Trigger keywords: BAA, business associate agreement, HIPAA contract, PHI vendor agreement, HITECH breach notice.

This skill should be used when establishing comprehensive QA testing processes for any software project. Use when creating test strategies, writing test cases following Google Testing Standards, executing test plans, tracking bugs with P0-P4 classification, calculating quality metrics, or generating progress reports. Includes autonomous execution capability via master prompts and complete documentation templates for third-party QA team handoffs. Implements OWASP security testing and achieves 90% coverage targets.

Scan a codebase, live app, or site and find the features that obviously should exist but don't — missing exports, bulk actions, search/filter, undo, history, notifications, dead-end workflows, data collected but never surfaced, backend endpoints with no UI, and half-built features that stopped partway. Produces an evidence-backed, ranked punch list (top 10 max) with a portable gap_packet JSON. Use whenever the user asks "what features are missing", "what's this app lacking", "find gaps", "run gap-scan", "feature audit", or wants proposal ammo from a prospect's app. Also use it to recheck an existing gap_packet — "what's left to do", "recheck the gaps", "what got built since" — re-verifying findings against current code and marking stale ones superseded. Flags ABSENCE only — broken code goes to code-audit, confusing flows to ux-audit, weak persuasion to conversion-audit, underexploited assets to a WWBD-style analysis. If something exists but is bad, it's not a gap — hand it off.

Unified multi-platform paid media audit with parallel execution. Spawns scored audits for Google Ads, Meta Ads, and Microsoft Ads simultaneously, merges results into a budget-weighted aggregate health score (A-F), adds cross-platform analysis (budget allocation, tracking consistency, creative alignment, attribution overlap), and produces a prioritized action plan. Optionally generates a client-ready deck via pro-deck-builder. Use when the user asks for a full paid media audit, cross-platform review, or multi-channel ad assessment.

Designer's eye QA: finds visual inconsistency, spacing issues, hierarchy problems, AI slop patterns, and slow interactions — then fixes them. Iteratively fixes issues in source code, committing each fix atomically and re-verifying with before/after screenshots. For plan-mode design review (before implementation), use /plan-design-review. Use when asked to "audit the design", "visual QA", "check if it looks good", or "design polish". Proactively suggest when the user mentions visual inconsistencies or wants to polish the look of a live site. (gstack)

TLS/SSL configuration audit. Tests protocol versions (SSLv2/3, TLS 1.0/1.1/1.2/1.3), cipher strength and ordering, certificate chain validation (intermediates, CT logs, OCSP stapling, pinning), known vulnerabilities (POODLE, BEAST, CRIME, Heartbleed, ROBOT, DROWN, Ticketbleed, GOLDENDOODLE), session management (ticket reuse, resumption, fixation), renegotiation attacks, TLS 1.3-specific issues (0-RTT replay, PSK modes, downgrade), HSTS deep analysis (preload, subdomains, bypass), and certificate revocation (CRL, OCSP responder, stapled response freshness). Compliance-mapped to PCI DSS 4.0 (full Section 4), NIST SP 800-52r2, and FedRAMP. Uses testssl.sh, sslscan, sslyze, openssl, nmap NSE scripts, and nuclei SSL templates. Multi-port scanning across 20+ TLS-bearing services.

Patent prior-art and landscape intelligence skill — not generic patent help. Commits to one of five sub-use-cases via forcing intake (novelty search / freedom-to-operate / competitive landscape / acquisition diligence / litigation prior-art) before any search runs. Searches Google Patents, Espacenet, USPTO, and optionally Lens.org for citation-graph signals. Output is an editable Word document (.docx) with verdict, ranked closest art (claim-text extracted), CPC-class-aware landscape, family-resolved hits, geographic coverage, FTO flags where applicable, strategy recommendations, and full audit log. Use when the user asks for patent searching or analysis (e.g., 'prior art search for [invention]', 'freedom to operate analysis for [product]'). Produces search signal, not legal advice — always recommends consulting a patent attorney before filing or licensing decisions. Trademark, copyright, and trade-secret questions are out of scope.

Decision-grade entity research skill — produces a hypothesis-tested dossier on a specific company, person, nonprofit, or government org, not a generic profile. Forcing intake makes the user state their hypothesis upfront (what they already believe and want to verify or disprove) so the dossier tests it rather than confirms it. Output is an editable Word document (.docx) with verdict on the hypothesis, identity facts, 12-month activity timeline, network and reputation signals, red flags, conversation hooks tied to specific findings, and source-provenance audit log. Uses WebSearch + WebFetch + free APIs (SEC EDGAR, GitHub, ProPublica) as workhorses; optional BYOK MCPs enhance coverage. Use when the user asks for background research, diligence, or meeting prep on a specific entity (e.g., 'prep me for a meeting with [person/company]', 'due diligence on [company]'). Honors sensitivity exclusions for journalism + personal-vetting contexts.

Mine a codebase or product for underexploited assets — capabilities, infrastructure, data, integrations, and workflows built for one narrow purpose that could produce far more value. Finds platform primitives hiding inside features, internal tooling that could serve customers, and data accumulated but never leveraged. Produces an evidence-gated report (max 5 opportunities, mandatory kill list, one forced answer) plus a wwbd_packet JSON. Use whenever the user says "WWBD", "what would Bezos do", "what are we sitting on", "what did we accidentally build", "what could this become", "find opportunities in this repo", "what are we underexploiting", "is there a product hiding in here", or wants to know if existing infrastructure has a bigger economic surface than it currently serves. Trigger on casual phrasings too ("anything valuable buried in this codebase?"). Analyzes what EXISTS — missing features go to gap-scan, broken code to code-audit, confusing flows to ux-audit, weak persuasion to conversion-audit.