'rspec' 검색 결과

Knowledge base from the GAO Agile Assessment Guide (GAO-24-105506, 2023). Use for assessing and managing Agile software development in federal programs: the Agile Manifesto and framework family (Scrum, Kanban, XP, SAFe, DA, DSDM, Lean, DevOps); the three adoption perspectives (team dynamics, program operations, organization environment); requirements decomposition (epics, features, user stories, INVEST, MoSCoW, definition of done); Agile-aware federal contracting (FAR, modular contracting, SOO/PWS/SOW, product owner vs. COR); program monitoring and control (WBS, cost, schedule, EVM at the feature level); Agile metrics (velocity, lead/cycle time, CFD, burn charts); and the auditor's key-question bank. Oversight- and acquisition-oriented: it tells you how to *assess and govern* Agile programs, not how to code. Thin on hands-on engineering practice, deep cost/schedule checklists (see gao-cost, gao-schedule), and any non-US-federal context.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Técnicas de preguntas sistémicas: Preguntas circulares, preguntas de escala, la pregunta del milagro y preguntas de excepción para la reflexión y la ampliación de perspectivas.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Systemic questioning techniques: Circular questions, scaling questions, miracle question, and exception questions for reflection and perspective expansion.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Genogram work: Recognizing and reflecting on family relationship patterns. Multigenerational perspective, genogram symbols, pattern recognition, and resources in family history.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Trabajo con genogramas: Reconocimiento y reflexión sobre los patrones de relaciones familiares. Perspectiva multigeneracional, símbolos del genograma, reconocimiento de patrones y recursos en la historia familiar.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Clarify requirements before implementing. Use when serious doubts arise.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Multi-perspective academic paper review with dynamic reviewer personas. Simulates 5 independent reviewers (EIC + 3 peer reviewers + Devil's Advocate) with field-specific expertise. Supports full review, re-review (verification), quick assessment, methodology focus, Socratic guided, and calibration modes. Triggers on: review paper, peer review, manuscript review, referee report, review my paper, critique paper, simulate review, editorial review, calibrate reviewer, reviewer calibration, measure reviewer accuracy.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Systematic strategic planning framework for philosophy and interdisciplinary academic papers targeting preprint platforms (PhilArchive, arXiv, PhilSci-Archive). Use when users want to: (1) plan a paper on a specific topic, (2) identify research gaps and assess originality, (3) develop optimized paper outlines, (4) prepare for preprint submission, or (5) understand platform requirements and writing standards. Triggered by phrases like 'plan a paper on,' 'help me design a paper about,' 'identify research gaps in,' 'is this idea original,' or when users need structured research planning. The skill guides through three phases: Platform Analysis (identifying target venue and studying sample papers), Theoretical Framework (AI-driven literature search and gap identification), and Outline Optimization (structured design with reviewer-perspective self-assessment). Each phase includes quality evaluation standards and validation checkpoints.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Multi-perspective academic paper review with dynamic reviewer personas. Runs a 5-seat, role-separated review panel (Journal-Fit Reviewer + 3 peer-review roles + Devil's Advocate) with field-specific expertise; role separation is not a claim of independent error processes. Supports full review, re-review (verification), quick assessment, methodology focus, Socratic guided, and calibration modes. Triggers on: review paper, peer review, manuscript review, referee report, review my paper, critique paper, simulate review, editorial review, calibrate reviewer, reviewer calibration, measure reviewer accuracy, 審查論文, 論文審查, 模擬審查, 同儕審查, 幫我審這篇, 以審查人角度評估, 審查者校準, 논문 심사, 동료 심사, 모의 심사, 심사자 관점에서 평가, 심사자 보정.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Solves UI lock-in. Reverse engineers your existing UI, strips all layout/token decisions, preserves every hook, handler, and API call untouched, then rebuilds the UI from scratch with a fresh design system. Use /ui-restructure to fully redesign, --style apple|linear|minimal|dashboard for named styles, --mode layout|theme|grid for partial rebuilds, --god-mode to redesign from the user's perspective using 100-user mindset simulation and 6 UX principles, --keep-tokens to preserve your token system, --prompt for custom redesigns. Applies mandatory world-class polish: spring motion, 5-state micro-interactions, 8pt spacing grid, WCAG accessibility. Supports Next.js, React, Vue 3, Tailwind, CSS Modules, styled-components, shadcn.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Multi-agent brainstorming: async opinion collision with expert personas. Mixed Codex/Claude Code engine. Use when multiple AI agents need to collaboratively discuss, debate, and converge on solutions through structured dialog. Triggers: brainstorm, multi-perspective discussion, opinion collision, expert debate, war room, collective intelligence, 头脑风暴, 多视角讨论, 集思广益.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Review resumes, cover letters, application packages, and evidence maps from an HR perspective. Use when the user asks for 자기소개서 리뷰, 자소서 검토, HR 검토, 제출 전 점검, unsupported-claim detection, company-name residue checks, or risk-focused revision advice before applying.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Routes general Convex requests to the right project skill. Use when the user asks which Convex skill to use or gives an underspecified Convex app task.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Evaluate design from a UX perspective, assessing visual hierarchy, information architecture, emotional resonance, cognitive load, and overall quality with quantitative scoring, persona-based testing, and actionable feedback. Use when the user asks to review, critique, evaluate, or give feedback on a design or component.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when: analysing a project's architecture, structure, and infrastructure health from the System perspective.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Multi-agent orchestration patterns. Use when multiple independent tasks can run with different domain expertise or when comprehensive analysis requires multiple perspectives.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Clarify requirements before implementing. Use when serious doubts arise.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Debate multi-agente: 2-4 perspectivas (PM, Arquiteto, QA, Security) debatem decisao tecnica. Output: decisao + rationale + dissenting opinions → ADR. Inspirado no Party Mode do BMAD-METHOD.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Generate the success criteria for a task or question, then review work against them. Given a task, goal, or open-ended question, decompose it into scenarios, evaluation perspectives, and fine-grained weighted YES/NO criteria using the Recursive Expansion Tree (RET) method; if work is supplied, score it criterion-by-criterion and surface what is missing or could be better. Use when asked to self-review or check your own work, judge whether a task is done well or completely, build a definition-of-done or completeness checklist, create an evaluation rubric or grading criteria, score or grade answers to a question, set up an LLM-as-judge rubric, or when the user mentions self-review, completeness check, success criteria, evaluation criteria, scoring rubric, Qworld, or the RET algorithm.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Evaluate an interface from a UX perspective, assessing hierarchy, information architecture, emotional resonance, cognitive load, and overall quality with evidence-linked judgments and actionable feedback. Use when the user wants an overall design or UX review—not when the main need is measurable accessibility/performance diagnosis, or final micro-detail polish.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Rewrite a rough request into a sharp, structured prompt before acting on it. Use when the user says "reprompt this", "reprompt", "improve this prompt", "make this prompt better", "structure this request", or hands you a vague/underspecified ask you should sharpen first. Complements the automatic per-turn sharpener (the UserPromptSubmit hook) for explicit, heavier rewrites. Personalizes from ~/.stellar-build/profile.md when present.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Orchestrates group discussions between installed BMAD agents, enabling natural multi-agent conversations where each agent is a real subagent with independent thinking. Use when user requests party mode, wants multiple agent perspectives, group discussion, roundtable, or multi-agent conversation about their project.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Three.js (three, WebGL / WebGPU 3D グラフィクス) r186 リファレンス。 Scene, Group, PerspectiveCamera, OrthographicCamera, WebGLRenderer, WebGPURenderer, RenderPipeline、 BufferGeometry, BufferAttribute, StorageBufferAttribute, Mesh, InstancedMesh, SkinnedMesh、 MeshStandardMaterial, MeshPhysicalMaterial, ShaderMaterial, node-materials (TSL)、 DirectionalLight, SpotLight, PointLight, AmbientLight, PMREMGenerator、 GLTFLoader, FBXLoader, DRACOLoader, TextureLoader、 AnimationMixer, AnimationClip, AnimationAction, KeyframeTrack, Timer、 AudioListener, PositionalAudio、 Vector3, Matrix4, Quaternion, Euler, Color, Box3, Raycaster、 OrbitControls, TransformControls, WebXRManager。

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Shakes your mental models with critical rigor, challenges assumptions, exposes blind spots, and provides multi-perspective insights as a strict thinking mentor. Deliberately breaks format conventions to stimulate genuine cognitive discomfort. Use when you want to stress-test an idea, shake your mental model, ask to challenge my assumptions, find blind spots, deepen my thinking, or request critical review with phrases like yusaburi or what do you think of this plan.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.