Bug-fixing workflow that coordinates diagnosis, test-driven reproduction, root-cause analysis, and targeted fixes. Use when the user wants to fix a bug with thorough investigation and regression testing.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Proactive bug-hunting workflow. Assesses codebase risk through complexity, coverage, and structural analysis, then spawns focused investigators that write reproducing tests to validate suspected bugs. Thoroughness over speed. Advisory only — produces findings and proposes tickets; does not implement fixes.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Full-lifecycle project workflow. Takes batched tickets, implements via /implement-batch, runs smoke tests, then executes a comprehensive quality pipeline (refactor, review-arch, review-test, tidy-docs, review-release). Maximizes autonomy with andon cord escape.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Autonomous bug-elimination loop. Iteratively invokes /bug-hunt and /implement-batch until findings converge below an operator-specified severity floor. At termination, runs /review-test scoped to the run's new reproducing tests and fixes quality issues above the floor. Auto-approves /bug-hunt and /review-test ticket proposals; pulls the andon cord on contested findings, repeated implementation failure, hard-cap exhaustion, or breaking-change proposals. Optional /refactor finisher.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Autonomous comprehensive refactoring. Three-phase pipeline — Phase 1 /refactor (tactical, loops internally to convergence) → Phase 2 loop of /review-arch + /implement-batch until architectural findings converge below a severity floor (default HIGH+) → Phase 3 /refactor (catches tactical issues introduced by restructuring). Auto-approves /review-arch ticket proposals; pulls the andon cord on contested findings, breaking-change proposals, repeated implementation failure, or Phase-2 hard-cap exhaustion (5 architectural iterations).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Cuts a project release. Discovers the project's release procedure (Makefile target, RELEASING.md, CI workflow, etc.) and offers to capture it durably if missing. Always invokes /review-release as preflight, proposes a version bump from CHANGELOG, then presents an exact command plan for operator confirmation before executing step-by-step. Halts on first failure rather than attempting rollback.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Performance review. Detects project type and dispatches compute and/or web performance reviewers. Advisory only — no changes made.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Pre-release readiness review. Scans for debug artifacts, version mismatches, changelog gaps, git hygiene issues, breaking changes, and license compliance. Runs tests and build verification. Presents consolidated findings for human review before release.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Good-faith divergent brainstorming for achieving a goal. Validates assumptions, then spawns brainstormers running different techniques (first-principles, working-backwards, lateral, analogical, constraints-shift, etc.) in isolation, and synthesizes the pool into a report of standouts, reasonable ideas, and hybrid combinations. Produces feedback only — no code, no tickets, no artifacts.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Adversarial deliberation process for making decisions. Spawns advocate agents for each option who argue their cases before a judge (you) who renders a verdict.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Prospective failure imagination for a plan, decision, or running system. Operates in two modes — **plan mode** (a plan has not yet been committed to; imagine its catastrophic failure broadly) and **scenario mode** (a specific catastrophic scenario is posed against an existing system; investigate causes against the actual code and architecture). Spawns parallel pre-mortemers in isolation across three categories of lens: standard failure classes (technical, operational, estimation, scope, adoption, dependency, team, incentive, detection, reversibility, adversarial), 0-3 ad-hoc target-specific lenses the orchestrator names when warranted, and a first-principles lens that always runs to catch what the prescribed taxonomy misses. Synthesizes into a prioritized risk register with early-warning signals. Produces feedback only — no code, no tickets, no artifacts.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Good-faith adversarial scrutiny of an idea or plan. Spawns critical skeptics across relevant lenses, pairs them with an advocate defending the idea, and synthesizes the exchange into a report. Produces feedback only — no code, no tickets, no artifacts.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Multi-ticket batch workflow. Takes a batch of tickets, plans execution order, implements each via /implement in autonomous mode, runs cross-cutting quality passes, and presents results for final review.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Iterative development workflow that coordinates implementation, refactoring, QA, and documentation agents to complete features systematically. Use when the user wants a full development workflow with quality checks.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Autonomous technical lead. Takes commander's intent and drives a project to completion through an OODA loop over implementation, refactoring, review, and bug-hunting skills. Has broad authority — creates tickets, commits, invokes any skill — and only escalates via andon cord for irreversible actions, public releases, or genuinely blocking decisions. User acts as product owner; skill acts as tech lead.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Autonomous comprehensive review. Once-through pipeline over /review-health, /review-arch, /review-security, /review-perf, /review-a11y, /review-test, /review-release. Operator-configurable ticket creation at startup — when ON, auto-approves sub-skill ticket proposals per the orchestrator-family contract; when OFF, uniformly declines and surfaces findings in the consolidated report. Auto-detects sub-skills that do not apply (no web content → skip /review-a11y; no tests → skip /review-test).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Pre-compaction housekeeping. Walks a checklist (persistent memory updates, git hygiene, trash cleanup) plus an open-judgment audit, produces an SBAR with a go/no-go recommendation, and emits a copy-pasteable resume prompt for the post-compaction agent if work remains. Run this immediately before /compact.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Autonomous iterative refactoring workflow. Scans for tactical code quality improvements (DRY, dead code, naming, complexity), implements through SMEs, verifies with QA, commits atomically, and loops until no improvements remain.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Architectural review workflow. Analyzes codebase organization via noun analysis and produces a target blueprint. Advisory only — does not implement changes. Always offers to cut tickets for the planned work; orchestrators receive the proposal and apply their own autonomy judgment to approve / edit / decline.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Adversarial project planning workflow. Explores the problem space, drafts tickets in batches, then runs sequential adversarial loops — a mandatory UX loop ("should we build this?"), zero or more discretionary specialist loops (security, performance) for projects with architectural implications in those domains, and a mandatory implementer loop ("could we build this?") — to find gaps before implementation. Creates well-specified, batch-tagged tickets upstream only after every applicable loop signs off.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Exploratory workflow for understanding problem spaces and drafting feature proposals, refactorings, or complex bug-fixes. Creates detailed tickets in your issue tracker without doing implementation work.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Mutation testing workflow. Systematically mutates source code to verify tests actually catch bugs. Multi-session with progress tracking.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Analysis of Competing Hypotheses. Operationalizes Richards Heuer's CIA-tradition technique for systematically narrowing among multiple hypotheses against evidence. Builds an explicit hypothesis-vs-evidence matrix and focuses on disconfirmation rather than confirmation — the central insight: hypotheses cannot be proven, only disconfirmed; the surviving hypothesis is the one with the least disconfirming evidence. Spawns parallel hypothesizers (in isolation, across hypothesis-generation angles) and parallel evidence-gatherers (across evidence classes), then synthesizes into a matrix, diagnosticity analysis, sensitivity analysis, and falsification milestones. Produces feedback only — no code, no tickets, no artifacts.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Abductive reasoning about causes. Takes a phenomenon, separates observations from interpretations, then spawns diagnosticians applying different reasoning lenses (technical, human-factors, process, incentive-structure, environmental, temporal, measurement-artifact, statistical) in isolation. Orchestrator evaluates candidate causes for fit-against-evidence, calibrates confidence honestly, and reports leading candidate(s) with distinguishing evidence needed. Produces feedback only — no code, no tickets, no artifacts.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.