Test Double

Internal harness probe for the OI-3 readability-guidance spike. Use only when explicitly told to invoke spike-probe. Verifies that a freshly-created project skill renders into a subagent's context via the Skill tool.

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。

OI-3 spike harness — heavy consumer skill, INLINE arm. Builds an incident post-mortem and sources the readability standard mid-workflow via an inline (non-forked) guidance skill. Use only when explicitly invoked by the spike harness with a TRIAL_ID and data path.

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。

OI-3 spike harness — the FORKED (context fork) readability-guidance variant. Same payload as the inline variant but declared to run in a forked context. Use only when a spike consumer skill invokes 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。

OI-3 spike harness — ADVERSARIAL inline guidance variant. Worst-case anchor: ends with a final-sounding completion statement and gives NO instruction to return to the caller. Use only when a spike consumer skill invokes 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。

OI-3 spike harness — the INLINE (non-forked) readability-guidance variant. Surfaces the shared readability standard into the calling skill's own context. Use only when a spike consumer skill invokes 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。

Break a work-items.md file (produced by /plan-work-items) into independently-grabbable Jira tickets, one per slice, in a single Jira project. Use when you want to turn a work-items file into Jira tickets, publish work items as Jira issues, or create implementation tickets that can be worked on and tracked in Jira. Requires a configured Atlassian MCP server. Does not produce the work-items file itself — use plan-work-items to break a plan into work items first. Does not post to GitHub — use work-items-to-issues for GitHub 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。

Creates or updates project documentation for a feature, system, or component and publishes it to a user-specified Confluence location. Use when the user wants feature or system documentation written to Confluence, posted to a Confluence space or page, or synced to a Confluence location. Requires a configured Atlassian MCP server. Does not document to local files only — use project-documentation for that. Does not publish an arbitrary existing markdown file — use markdown-to-confluence for that. Does not plan or specify a new feature to Confluence — use plan-a-feature-to-confluence for that. Does not create architectural decision records — use architectural-decision-record. Does not create coding standards — use coding-standard. Does not produce runbooks — use runbook.

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 an evidence-based investigation of a bug, failure, or unexpected behavior with investigate and publishes the resulting investigation report to a user-specified Confluence location. Use when the user wants something debugged, diagnosed, or root-caused AND the findings posted to a Confluence space or page. Requires a configured Atlassian MCP server. Does not investigate to a local file only — use investigate. Does not publish an arbitrary existing markdown file — use markdown-to-confluence. Does not document an already-understood feature to Confluence — use project-documentation-to-confluence. Does not plan or specify a new feature to Confluence — use plan-a-feature-to-confluence. Does not publish to Jira — use work-items-to-jira.

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。

Walks a person through code changes one step at a time in conversation, starting at the entry point and following the flow that changes, showing a small chunk per step and explaining it in plain language. Defaults to the current branch's changes, and walks the code from the perspective of any context provided instead — a file, directory, symbol, pull request, plan, or ticket. Use when someone wants to be walked through, taught, paced through, or shown around code or a branch step by step, or to learn how a change works before reviewing or extending it. Stops after every step and waits, so the learner sets the pace. Paces through code that already exists and builds nothing — to build new work while being paced through it, use pairing. Does not produce a written overview to read alone — use code-overview. Does not review code quality — use code-review. Does not diagnose bugs — use investigate.

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 a comprehensive code review on local source files. Use this skill when the user asks to review, audit, inspect, evaluate, or check code, even if they never use the word "review." Does not post comments to GitHub pull requests — use post-code-review-to-pr for that. Does not analyze architectural structure or module boundaries — use architectural-analysis for that. Does not explain code or a PR to build understanding before reviewing — use code-overview for a written overview, or code-walkthrough to be paced through it one step at a time. Does not map bounded contexts or domain boundaries — use ddd-analysis for that. Does not capture feedback on Han's own skills — use han-feedback for 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。

Creates and updates coding standards, conventions, rules, and guidelines for the current project. Use when creating new standards from scratch, converting existing documents into coding standards, or updating existing standards. Does not create architectural decision records — use architectural-decision-record for ADRs. Does not write feature or system documentation — use project-documentation for that. Does not research open-ended options — use research. Does not produce runbooks for operational scenarios — use runbook for 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。

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。

Evidence-based investigation of issues, bugs, API calls, integrations, and other aspects of software development that need a deep dive to find the root cause and solutions. Use when you need to debug, troubleshoot, diagnose, or figure out why something is broken. Does not review code for quality or style — use code-review for auditing changes or post-code-review-to-pr for posting review feedback to GitHub. Does not assess architectural health or structural risk — use architectural-analysis for architectural concerns. Does not research open-ended options, prior art, or how something works when nothing is broken — use research for that. Does not plan the structural change a root cause calls for — use plan-a-change. Does not map bounded contexts or domain boundaries — use ddd-analysis. Does not capture feedback on Han's own skills — use han-feedback for 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。

Write code through a disciplined, BDD-framed Test-Driven Development loop: build a behavior test list, then drive each behavior through red-green-refactor with an enforced observed-failure gate. Use when the user wants to implement, build, or write code test-first, "do TDD", follow "red-green-refactor", drive code from tests, choose the next test by the Transformation Priority Premise (TPP) or ZOMBIES ordering, or grow a feature behavior-by-behavior with tests leading. This skill writes and changes code; it does not produce a test plan document (use automated-test-planning, or manual-test-planning for a plan a person runs by hand), review or audit existing code (use code-review), restructure existing code outside a TDD loop (use refactor, or plan-a-change to plan a multi-module restructure), specify what a feature should do (use plan-a-feature), or find the root cause of a bug (use investigate). Runs its loop to completion without pausing for review; to review each behavior 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。

Builds a feature specification from scratch with plan-a-feature and publishes it to a user-specified Confluence location, posting the spec as a parent page and each companion artifact (decision log, team findings, technical notes) as a child page beneath it. Use when the user wants a new feature planned, designed, scoped, or specified AND posted to a Confluence space or page. Requires a configured Atlassian MCP server. Does not plan to local files only — use plan-a-feature. Does not publish an arbitrary existing markdown file — use markdown-to-confluence. Does not refine or stress-test an existing plan — use iterative-plan-review. Does not document already-built features to Confluence — use project-documentation-to-confluence.

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 or update a runbook for an operational scenario — an incident an alert fires for, a recurring scheduled task, or a known failure mode on a live service — using a consistent template. Use when writing, drafting, authoring, or updating a runbook for an alert, incident, on-call procedure, scheduled maintenance, or operational SOP. Applies a YAGNI preflight requiring the scenario to be real before producing the runbook. Does not produce feature or system documentation — use project-documentation. Does not record architectural decisions — use architectural-decision-record. Does not create coding standards — use coding-standard.

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, extract, or convert an ADR (architectural decision record) using the ADR template. Use when creating new ADRs, extracting an ADR from existing documentation, converting a document into an ADR, recording an architecture or design decision, or updating the status of an existing ADR. Does not create or update enforceable coding standards or conventions — use coding-standard for that. Does not write feature or system documentation — use project-documentation 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。

Produces a human-readable, progressive-disclosure overview of unfamiliar code or a pull request's changes — why it exists (the real problem it solves or goal it serves for the business or a user), and from there what it does, how it flows, and where to start — so you can get up to speed before working on or reviewing it. Use when you want to understand, get oriented in, make sense of, explain, or get up to speed on a chunk of code, a file, a directory, a symbol, or a PR's changes. Writes the overview to a scratch file and changes no code. Does not review code quality or raise findings — use code-review for auditing changes or post-code-review-to-pr for posting them. Does not produce durable feature or system documentation — use project-documentation. Does not assess architecture or structural risk — use architectural-analysis. Does not diagnose bugs or root-cause failures — use investigate. Does not pace a person through the code one step at a time in conversation — use code-walkthrough.

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。

Capture structured feedback on the Han skills and agents used in the current session and optionally post it as a GitHub issue to testdouble/han. Use at the end of any session where one or more han-* skills or agents ran, to rate a run, log what worked and what didn't, or submit observations for maintainers. Does not review code, investigate bugs, or research options; use code-review, investigate, or research for those. Does not provide feedback on skills or agents from non-Han plugins.

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 a full pull request review and post review comments directly to the current branch's GitHub PR. Requires the gh CLI to be installed and a PR to already exist for the current branch. Use when you want review feedback posted to GitHub as PR comments. For local code review without posting to GitHub, use code-review instead. Does not write or update PR descriptions — use update-pr-description for 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。

Break a work-items.md file (produced by /plan-work-items) into independently-grabbable GitHub issues, one per slice, in each slice's target repo. Use when you want to turn a work-items file into GitHub issues, publish work items as issue tickets, or create implementation tickets that can be worked on and tracked on GitHub. Does not produce the work-items file itself — use plan-work-items to break a plan into work items first. Does not review code or post pull request comments — use post-code-review-to-pr for 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。

Turn a work-items.md file (produced by /plan-work-items) into Linear issues, one per slice, in a single target Linear team. Use when you want to publish work items as Linear issues, create implementation tickets to track in Linear, or push a broken-down plan into a Linear team. Requires a configured Linear MCP server and a target team. Reads the team's real workflow states, labels, Projects, and members and resolves every option against them before creating anything; defaults each issue to the team's initial state, unassigned, uncategorized, with no parent or Project unless you ask. Links within-file `Depends on` relationships as native Linear "blocked by" relations and annotates the source file so re-runs resume cleanly. Does not produce the work-items file itself — use plan-work-items first. Does not post to Jira — use work-items-to-jira. Does not post to GitHub — use work-items-to-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。

Plans an architecture-driven change to code that already exists: module boundaries, type responsibilities, layering, coupling, and the public surface a revision moves. Produces a buildable change plan that names the types, modules, and methods involved and records the surface delta each change makes. Use when the user wants to plan, scope, or sequence a restructure, extraction, split, consolidation, responsibility shift, or API revision of existing code, including "these responsibilities are wrong, plan the fix". Does not assess an area and stop at findings — use architectural-analysis. Does not specify new behavior — use plan-a-feature. Does not diagnose a bug — use investigate. Does not write the code — use refactor to restructure it or tdd to build 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。

Discovers the core attributes of the current code repository and its projects — languages, frameworks, tooling, and where things live — and writes a concise reference section directly into the project's AGENTS.md or CLAUDE.md for other skills, agents, and hooks to consume. Use when scanning, analyzing, or detecting the project's technology stack, build tools, or repository structure. Does not create or update project documentation — use project-documentation for writing feature or system 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。