Results for “kiss”

Use when putting a person from a photo into live-broadcast crowd footage with Scenario: a stadium or arena fan-cam reaction, a jumbotron or kiss-cam moment, a spectator cutaway at a match or concert, a courtside or front-row sighting, or a personalized sports-TV still that then animates into video. Keywords: fan cam, crowd reaction, jumbotron, stadium screen, kiss cam, broadcast cutaway, spectator, crowd shot, sports TV, courtside, arena.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Rewrites code to its simplest possible form while preserving exact external behavior (KISS, YAGNI).

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Enforces KISS/DRY/YAGNI during authoring and ad-hoc quality reviews. Pragmatic standards: concise, direct, no unnecessary comments. NOT for post-hoc diff/PR review (see mk:review); NOT for behavior-preserving simplification passes (see mk:simplify).

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Technical research methodology with YAGNI/KISS/DRY principles. Phases: scope definition, information gathering, analysis, synthesis, recommendation. Capabilities: technology evaluation, architecture analysis, best practices research, trade-off assessment, solution design. Actions: research, analyze, evaluate, compare, recommend technical solutions. Keywords: research, technology evaluation, best practices, architecture analysis, trade-offs, scalability, security, maintainability, YAGNI, KISS, DRY, technical analysis, solution design, competitive analysis, feasibility study. Use when: researching technologies, evaluating architectures, analyzing best practices, comparing solutions, assessing technical trade-offs, planning scalable/secure systems.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Design and refactor Python components with clear responsibilities and simple structure. Assess when to split large classes, combine objects instead of extending them, and extract shared code without introducing unnecessary abstractions.

• Defining responsibilities for a new Python component
• Splitting oversized classes and functions
• Deciding when to extract shared code

Review Qwen Code issues and pull requests through staged checks. Assess product fit, code simplicity, and CI evidence, then prepare English and Chinese comments that explain findings and flag decisions needing maintainer attention.

• Triage incoming Qwen Code issues
• Check pull requests against product direction
• Review changes for unnecessary complexity

Clarify ambiguous requirements through focused dialogue before implementation. Use when requirements are unclear, features are complex (>2 days), or involve cross-team coordination. Ask two core questions - Why? (YAGNI check) and Simpler? (KISS check) - to ensure clarity before coding.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Review generated or changed production code before it ships, using Clean Code, SOLID, DRY, KISS, YAGNI, and LLM-specific failure-mode checks in any programming language. Best used reactively after an agent writes, edits, refactors, or fixes code, before presenting, committing, or merging the result. Use when the user asks "review this PR", "is this safe to merge?", "make this cleaner", "audit this code", "refactor this", "fix this bug", or after a coding agent produced implementation code. Can also guide writing when explicitly invoked before a risky edit. Invoke it on your own initiative the moment you finish writing, editing, or refactoring non-trivial production code, before presenting or committing — don't wait to be asked. DO NOT USE for factual/conceptual questions, CI/tooling config, git workflow, running/debugging tests, pure architecture discussion, prose writing, data analysis, or test-code review (use test-guard).

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Clean Code principles (DRY, KISS, YAGNI), naming, function design and readability. Use when code is hard to read, with long methods, unclear names, duplication or deep nesting. For how responsibilities are split across classes and which way dependencies point, use solid-principles instead.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Applies KISS, YAGNI, and SOLID principles for clean code with reduced complexity. Use when refactoring or reviewing code for over-engineering.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Software design principles, patterns, and architecture from SOLID through distributed systems. Covers the five SOLID principles with violations and fixes, DRY/KISS/YAGNI heuristics, separation of concerns, 12 GoF design patterns organized by intent (creational, structural, behavioral), architectural patterns (MVC, MVP, MVVM, layered, hexagonal, microservices, event-driven), coupling and cohesion metrics, dependency injection, and the design decision framework for choosing between competing approaches. Use when making design decisions, reviewing architecture, refactoring code, or teaching software engineering principles.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Evaluates SAFE, convertible note, and KISS structures with conversion mechanics, caps, discounts, and MFN provisions. Use when analyzing convertible instruments, comparing SAFE vs note terms, or modeling conversion scenarios.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Clean Code (Robert C. Martin) guide to produce and challenge code that is readable, durable, simple, and consistent. Covers naming, functions, comments, smells, and refactor heuristics. Complements `/solid` (SOLID principles) and `/anti-overengineering` (YAGNI/KISS). Activate during the REFACTOR phase of the TDD cycle and during implementation self-review.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Audit a codebase against well-known software design principles: SOLID, DRY, YAGNI, KISS, Law of Demeter, Separation of Concerns, Composition over Inheritance, and the code-relevant 12-Factor subset. Scores findings by impact and effort, runs adversarial debate on contested violations, and generates a prioritized DESIGN_AUDIT.md. Use when reviewing code quality beyond what linters catch, assessing design health before a refactor, or onboarding to an unfamiliar codebase. Can be invoked standalone or delegated from tech-debt.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Checks DRY (10 types), KISS/YAGNI, error handling, DI patterns. Returns findings with severity, location, effort, pattern_signature.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Checks DRY/KISS/YAGNI/architecture compliance with quantitative Code Quality Score. Validates decisions via MCP Ref. Reports with SEC-/PERF-/MNT-/ARCH-/BP-/OPT- prefixes.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Clarify ambiguous requirements through focused dialogue before implementation. Use when requirements are unclear, features are complex (>2 days), or involve cross-team coordination. Ask two core questions - Why? (YAGNI check) and Simpler? (KISS check) - to ensure clarity before coding.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Enforces KISS/DRY/YAGNI during authoring and ad-hoc reviews: concise, direct, no unneeded comments. NOT for post-hoc diff/PR review (mk:review); NOT for simplification passes (mk:simplify).

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.