Interview the user deeply about a plan, probing technical implementation, UI/UX, risks, tradeoffs, and missing decisions before writing or refining a spec. Use when the user says "interview me" or asks to be questioned about a plan.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Generate onboarding documentation for a codebase — architecture overview, key files, local setup, and common gotchas. Use this skill whenever someone asks to onboard onto a codebase, create onboarding docs, generate a codebase overview, explain a project's architecture to newcomers, or asks "how does this codebase work". Also trigger when users say things like "document this repo for new devs", "write a getting started guide", or "help me understand this project".
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Post-launch review of a shipped PRD against the brief's success metrics. Did we move the metric? What did the data actually show? Which assumptions held, which broke? Which accepted-gap decisions resolved (confirmed vs. invalidated)? What would we do differently? Triggers on "outcome review", "did it work", "post-launch review", "did we move the metric", "retro the feature", "was it worth it". Produces a Confluence outcome-review page and updates the brief + linked decisions.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Generate a Product Requirements Document (PRD) for a new feature. Use when planning a feature, starting a new project, or when asked to create a PRD. Triggers on: create a prd, write prd for, plan this feature, requirements for, spec out.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Product-discovery coach for Fishbowl engineers — inspired by Marty Cagan's work (never impersonates him). Stage-routes between opportunity brief, research, PRD, ticket drafting, and outcome review. Triggers on "product coach", "help me with product", "I need to write a PRD", "I want to do discovery", "opportunity assessment", "who is this for", "why are we building this", or when an engineer is starting, resuming, or post-mortem-ing product-adjacent work. Invoke with a short description of what you want to do, or invoke bare to be surveyed and routed.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Convert PRDs to prd.json format for the Ralph autonomous agent system. Use when you have an existing PRD and need to convert it to Ralph's JSON format. Triggers on: convert this prd, turn this into ralph format, create prd.json from this, ralph json.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Use when adding a test to an existing codebase for behavior that is already implemented. Ensures the test is meaningful by mutation-verifying it — breaking the production code to confirm the test fails for the expected reason. Triggers when the user says "add a test for existing behavior", "backfill test coverage", "the test passes on first run", or any scenario where a test is written without a corresponding new production change.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
XP-style plan review that identifies gaps, hidden assumptions, and critical misses. Triggers on 'review the plan', 'check the plan', 'audit the plan'. Reviews plans for YAGNI violations, missing feedback loops, and over-engineering.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Brutally honest AGENTS.md/CLAUDE.md review backed by real A/B test evidence. Not just opinions — actual proof that your rules are dead weight. Roasts instruction files for bloat, slop, and redundancy, then proves it by running evals. Use when user says "roast my agents.md", "roast my CLAUDE.md", "prove my rules are useless", "eval roast", or wants entertaining evidence-based feedback on their AI config files. Also triggers on "audit my instructions" or "are my rules helping".
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Save the latest learning as a numbered markdown file under ~/.claude/learnings and update the learnings index with title and tags. Use when the user says "save", asks to record a learning, or wants the current insight stored for later.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Apply Steven's Bash script style rules: strict mode, minimal validation, concise logic, executable scripts, and no unnecessary comments or echoes. Use when creating, reviewing, or refactoring shell scripts.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Split user stories into smaller, independently deliverable slices using the SPIDR method (Spike, Path, Interface, Data, Rules). Use this skill whenever the user asks to split a story, break down work, slice a story, asks "can this be split", mentions "SPIDR", says "story splitting", or wants to decompose a large ticket into smaller pieces. Also trigger when a user presents a story that seems too large for a single sprint and asks for help sizing or scoping it.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Two-phase code quality skill: (1) review codebase for structural smells — file LOC, method LOC, accidental complexity, test readability — producing a structured report, then (2) fix all smells via provable refactorings with ACN micro commits and green-bar-at-all-times discipline. Use this skill when the user says 'sweep', 'code review', 'find code smells', 'check method lengths', 'review for complexity', 'tidy up the codebase', 'refactor smells', or asks about long methods, test readability, or accidental complexity. Also trigger when users ask to 'clean up' or 'improve code quality' across multiple files.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Use when implementing a new function, adding a feature, fixing a bug, refactoring with test coverage, or writing a new test. Enforces strict outside-in red-green-refactor TDD with one-failure-per-turn discipline, predict-the-failure-before-every-run checks, hardcode-first minimum changes, triangulation, and property-based testing for large input spaces. Triggers on explicit TDD requests and on any task phrased as "implement", "add", "write a function", "build a feature", or "fix a bug" in a test-capable codebase. Reports red/green validation evidence.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Teach the user a new skill or concept, within this workspace.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Acceptance-test newly added features using browser automation, happy-path flows, screenshots, UX notes, and a written report. Use when asked to test a feature, verify a recent UI change, or check whether an app workflow works.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Systematically explore an unfamiliar codebase and build a reusable architecture summary. Use for repo onboarding, understanding legacy or inherited code, mapping architecture before a migration or refactor, tracing a bug or feature path, or answering "what does this project do?". Documentation-first, then data flow — ends in a concise technical architecture summary with file:line evidence, not a raw file dump.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Mitigate incidental code complexity when control flow is tangled, nesting is deep, names are hard to parse, or reasoning requires cross-file hops. Use when a review stalls on readability, you need an analysis-first refactor plan before edits, or you want essential-vs-incidental verdicts, ranked simplification steps, a small structural sketch, and a TRACE assessment (analysis-only; no edits).
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Lateral-thinking playbook that always returns a five-tier strategy portfolio (Quick Win through Moonshot). Use when you need options, alternatives, or trade-offs; when progress is stalled or failing repeatedly; or when you ask to think creatively, reframe constraints, and choose a strategic path before execution.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Run a targeted fresh-eyes blunder pass over code, specs, plans, reviews, closure gates, or skill edits. Use when asked to reread with fresh eyes, find obvious bugs, catch mistakes/oversights/omissions, check for embarrassing misses, or do a second independent pass before closure. Use it as the final falsification/check pass for another workflow, not as a substitute for implementation or verification.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Create a language-agnostic ghost package (spec + portable tests) from an existing repo by extracting SPEC.md, exhaustive tests.yaml (operations and/or scenarios), INSTALL.md, README.md, VERIFY.md, and upstream LICENSE files with provenance and regeneration instructions. Use when prompts say "/tw-ghost", "ghostify this repo", "spec-ify/spec-package this library", "ghost library", or ask to extract portable spec/tests for libraries or tool-using agent loops (scenario testing); do not use for implementation work or editing skills.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Build a rich, self-contained HTML explanation of a code change — diff, branch, commit range, MR/PR — with background, intuition, a code walkthrough, diagrams, and a glossary, then quiz the reader interactively in chat. Use when the user asks to explain a change, understand a PR/MR, walk through a diff, onboard onto a branch, or says "explain this PR", "what does this branch do", "teach me this change", or "/explain-diff".
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Run a second, harder escalation pass using the original glazer prompt words verbatim. Use when prompts say `/tw-glazer`, when a first escalation still feels incremental, or when you want the exact original rhetoric preserved while forcing a sharper replacement rather than more polish.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Analyze a local codebase and infer the architecture it is actually using, including repo kind, best-fit dominant architecture, directly evidenced coexisting patterns, major subsystem exceptions, confidence, docs-vs-code drift, and repo-fit hints for downstream agents. Use when prompts ask what architecture a repo uses, whether it is really hexagonal or just layered, what subtle patterns shape a repo or slice, how a target slice fits a hybrid monorepo, whether documented architecture matches implementation, or when `/tw-tk` needs a repo-dialect preflight before making a minimal change.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Is this your account? Link GitHub to bring it onto your creator page (Japanese)