'hypothesis-driven' 검색 결과

Systematic, hypothesis-driven debugging workflow with triage-based track routing. Use for debugging, fixing bugs, and investigating errors.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Systematic, hypothesis-driven debugging workflow with triage-based track routing. Use when asked to "fix this bug", "debug this", "why is this failing", "this is broken", "investigate this error", "track down this issue", or any debugging situation. Supports --deep flag to force full investigation.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Design and execute chaos engineering experiments using Litmus or Chaos Mesh. Test system resilience through controlled fault injection, validate hypothesis-driven tests, and improve failure recovery. Use before major product launches, after architecture changes to validate resilience, during GameDays or disaster recovery drills, to validate assumptions about failure modes, or as part of an SRE maturity program.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Generate structured Product Requirements Documents using hypothesis-driven methodology with Implementation Phases tracking.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Specialized research and analysis prompt methodology for Claude. Provides 11 tested approaches (3 identity, 4 reasoning, 4 output) for data analysis, policy research, systematic evidence review, investigative research, and research-specific deliverables. Use when building prompts for quantitative data interpretation, evidence-based policy recommendations, literature reviews, causal analysis, hypothesis-driven investigation, or briefing documents. Trigger on: "prompt for data analysis," "research prompt," "policy brief prompt," "literature review prompt," "prompt for investigating," "systematic review prompt," "build a prompt for evidence synthesis," "causal analysis prompt," "briefing document prompt." Also use when user describes a research or analytical task and needs a structured Claude prompt for it. Do NOT use for evaluating existing prompts (use rootnode-prompt-validation if available) or auditing Claude Projects (use rootnode-project-audit if available).

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Frames a structured, testable threat-hunting hypothesis: grounding it in adversary behavior and available telemetry, defining the data sources and detection logic, and setting success criteria and outcomes. Activates for requests to start a threat hunt, write a hunt hypothesis, or plan a hypothesis-driven hunt.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Design and analyze engineering experiments or simulations using baseline cases, hypothesis-driven DOE, traceable data processing, defensible plots, uncertainty, and validation. Use for CFD, laboratory data, ML workflows, parameter studies, or research code.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Expert guidance for deep security incident and entity investigations in Google SecOps. Use when investigating cases, analyzing entities (hosts, IPs, domains, hashes, users), extracting and searching UDM events, performing asset and user timeline analysis, and detecting lateral movement across enterprise networks. Don't use for detection rule authoring or YARA-L tuning (use secops-detection-engineering), proactive hypothesis-driven hunting (use secops-hunt), initial alert triage (use secops-triage), or basic case status updates (use secops-cases).

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

MUST USE for any real runtime debugging across ANY language or binary — crashes, silent failures, wrong responses, stuck processes, memory leaks, async misbehavior, unexplained timing, reverse engineering. Runs a hypothesis-driven loop: form ≥3 hypotheses, investigate in parallel, after 2 failed rounds spawn Oracles from orthogonal angles, confirm root cause, lock with a failing test, fix minimally, QA by actually USING the system, scrub artifacts. The actual HOW lives in `references/` — READ THEM. Triggers: 'debug this', 'why is X not working', 'hanging', 'attach a debugger', 'reverse engineer', 'pwndbg', 'gdb', 'lldb', 'node inspect', 'tsx debug', 'pdb', 'dlv', 'delve', 'rust-gdb', 'set a breakpoint', 'context window exploded', 'why is the response empty', 'attach the debugger', 'debug it', 'why is this happening', 'trace this bug', 'reproduce and fix', 'silent failure', 'HTTP 200 but empty', 'why did it stop', 'inspect the binary', 'reverse engineering', 'playwright'.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when a bug has multiple plausible causes across layers — competing hypotheses, validation loops, evidence-based conclusions — even when the user just says 'why is this happening?'.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Hunt for adversary techniques in telemetry you are authorized to query. Hypothesis-driven, evidence-first, no live offensive operations.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

This skill should be used when the user wants to "investigate a bug", "debug an issue", "figure out why something is happening", "find the root cause", "troubleshoot", "強い推論で調査", "仮説を立てて検証", "原因を特定", "バグの原因調査", "なぜ動かないか調べて", "問題を切り分け", "原因不明", "デバッグ", or mentions systematic hypothesis-driven debugging. NOTE: Use this for investigating UNKNOWN causes, not for validating design proposals (use devils-advocate for that).

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.