'did' 검색 결과

Review or refactor an existing SKILL.md and its bundled resources — a smaller always-loaded core, conditional references, preserved behavior, lean/guided consumer profiles, and an A/B protocol to compare a candidate with the previous version. Use when a skill repeats itself, loads references on every run, triggers too broadly or misses legitimate requests, or needs its efficiency measured across models. Do NOT use for writing a new skill from scratch, refactoring application code, translating a skill verbatim, or performing the target skill's own task.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Manage project learnings. Review, search, prune, and export what gstack has learned across sessions. Use when asked to "what have we learned", "show learnings", "prune stale learnings", or "export learnings". Proactively suggest when the user asks about past patterns or wonders "didn't we fix this before?"

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Weekly engineering retrospective. Analyzes commit history, work patterns, and code quality metrics with persistent history and trend tracking. Team-aware: breaks down per-person contributions with praise and growth areas. Use when asked to "weekly retro", "what did we ship", or "engineering retrospective". Proactively suggest at the end of a work week or sprint. (gstack)

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Produces a compact KPI digest showing how key metrics changed over a period and what's driving the movement. Use this skill when someone asks for a performance summary, a weekly recap, a morning briefing, a KPI update, or any variation of "how did we do this week/month." Also trigger for requests like "give me a performance overview," "what moved in the last 7 days," "pull our KPI report," or "summarize our metrics."

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Produces a compact KPI digest showing how key metrics changed over a period and what's driving the movement. Use this skill when someone asks for a performance summary, a weekly recap, a morning briefing, a KPI update, or any variation of "how did we do this week/month." Also trigger for "give me a performance overview," "what moved in the last 7 days," "pull our AA KPI report," or "summarize our metrics."

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Generates a polished, leadership-ready performance briefing with KPI tiles, executive narrative bullets, and a driver analysis — all as a print-ready HTML document. Always use this skill when someone asks for an executive summary, performance briefing, leadership readout, stakeholder update, or business review — even if they don't say "executive" explicitly. Trigger phrases include: "write a summary of last week's performance," "create a briefing for our leadership team," "produce a monthly business review," "what should I tell executives about our metrics," "generate a performance narrative," "QBR summary," "weekly business review," "board update," "stakeholder briefing," "how did we do last week," or "give me a performance snapshot." When in doubt, use this skill — it is always better to produce a polished briefing than a raw data dump.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Summarize authored commits over a user-specified time period into a concise update

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Route natural-language cleanup, refactor, migration, and candidate ranking goals through ATM before local analysis.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Record durable project decisions with rationale, alternatives, assumptions, status, and revisit triggers. Load when the user says record this decision, we decided, decision log, why did we choose, revisit this later, or capture architectural/process rationale.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Review code changes for correctness, completeness, bugs, edge cases, and quality. Load when the user explicitly asks to review code, check a PR, review a diff, audit recent changes, or verify an implementation matches requirements. Also triggers on "review this code", "check this PR", "review my changes", "code review", "did this implement correctly", "audit this diff", or any explicit request for a formal code review. Do NOT load for "review changes for context" or "review what happened" — those are requests to read code, not to perform a formal review.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Write a rigorous, decision-grade experiment spec — falsifiable hypothesis, primary metric, guardrails, randomisation unit, exposure definition, method (A/B, holdout, switchback, quasi-experiment, MAB), MDE/duration plan, peek policy, validity threats, and pre-committed decision rule. Platform-agnostic. Load when the user has a candidate experiment and needs to spec it before launch, or says "spec this experiment", "write the test plan", "design this A/B test", "what's the hypothesis", "how big a sample do we need", "how long should we run this", "define the metrics for this test", or when the experimentation orchestrator routes here.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Instrument a shipped product's AI agents with tracing and observability so you can see what they did, why outputs happened, and what each run cost. Plain-language primer plus free-tier-first backend selection (Langfuse, Phoenix, LangSmith, Braintrust) and OpenTelemetry/OpenInference instrumentation. Load when the user asks to add observability, add tracing, instrument my agents, see what my agent is doing in production, set up Langfuse or Phoenix or LangSmith, debug why my agent gave a bad answer, or track LLM cost per request. Also fires when agent-system-architecture or setup-evaluation requires an observability plan for an agent-chain product. NOT for tracing the coding agent itself — that is run-trace. Precondition for runtime-learning-loop.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Find the earliest decisive failure in an agent run trace and propose an evidence-backed targeted repair. Load when a run failed, results are wrong, or the user asks what went wrong in an agent session. Also triggers on "localize the fault", "first incorrect step", "debug this run", "trace attribution", "why did the agent fail", or after run-trace captures errors. Pairs with debug-and-fix for code defects and dynamic-routing for plan faults.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Run Mom Test–style customer-discovery interviews to validate or kill an unbuilt idea — generate a non-leading interview guide, conduct or coach the conversations, and synthesize signal vs compliments. Load when the user asks to do customer discovery, run problem interviews, validate an idea with users, run a Mom Test, design an interview guide, or says "talk to customers", "validate the problem", "interview users", "Mom Test this", "did real users want it", "synthesize my interviews", "I just talked to N people". Sub-skill of `venture-exploration`. Hard-bans "would you use this?", solution-pitching, friend/family-only ICP, and treating compliments as validation. Calls `secure-*` before synthesizing any pasted external transcripts.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Run a structured retrospective after development-phase runs of your product's agents — interview the owner in plain language about what went well and poorly, draft ranked improvement hypotheses, then design and run small n=1/n=2 experiments with pre-declared success criteria, guardrails, stop conditions, and a cost/ROI kill-switch. Load when the user says how did that run go, retro this run, the agent output was bad, what should we improve, draft hypotheses, run a small experiment, or after repeated dev runs of an agentic system produce uneven quality. Priority: output quality over performance over cost, each with diminishing-returns stops. NOT a product A/B test (experimentation), NOT coding-agent harness repair (harness-evolution), NOT production-scale learning (runtime-learning-loop).

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Capture the "why" behind technical choices to prevent architectural drift. Load when the user makes a major technical decision, chooses a library/framework, defines a system boundary, or changes a core architectural pattern. Also triggers on "record a decision", "write an ADR", "why did we do this", "document this architectural choice", or "architectural decision record". Supports `SYNTHESIS=true` mode for retrospective ADR backfill from observed repo state — used by `retroactive-project-setup` and any future backfill skill. Essential for long-term project maintainability and agent alignment.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Automate recruiting and hiring workflows in Ashby -- manage candidates, jobs, applications, interviews, and notes through natural language commands.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Azure Identity SDK for Rust authentication. Use for DeveloperToolsCredential, ManagedIdentityCredential, ClientSecretCredential, and token-based authentication.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Advogado criminalista especializado em Maria da Penha, violencia domestica, feminicidio, direito penal brasileiro, medidas protetivas, inquerito policial e acao penal.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Identify tumor neoantigens from somatic variants with pVACtools (pVACseq/pVACfuse/pVACbind/pVACvector/pVACview) for personalized cancer vaccines and checkpoint biomarkers. Encodes the field's hard truth that binding prediction is the easy, near-solved part and single-digit-percent PPV lives downstream — so it centers clonality/CCF, HLA LOH (the silent invalidator), expression, proximal-variant phasing, agretopicity/foreignness quality, and the predicted->presented->immunogenic validation tiers. Use when nominating vaccine targets, ranking neoantigens, or building a tumor-to-candidate pipeline. Binding details in mhc-binding-prediction; ranking in immunogenicity-scoring.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Designs and ranks guide RNAs (sgRNAs) for CRISPR-Cas9/Cas12a gene knockout by scanning a target for PAM sites (NGG SpCas9, NNGRRT SaCas9, TTTV Cas12a, NG SpCas9-NG, near-PAMless SpRY), enumerating candidate spacers, applying hard filters (Pol-III TTTT terminator, 5' G, GC), ranking on-target activity with the context-appropriate model (Rule Set 2/Azimuth for U6/lentiviral, CRISPRscan for T7/embryo, DeepHF for high-fidelity variants, DeepCpf1 for Cas12a), and predicting the indel/frameshift outcome (Bae out-of-frame score, inDelphi, FORECasT, Lindel). Use when selecting sgRNAs to knock out a gene, choosing a nuclease/PAM for a constrained locus, picking which exon to target, or shortlisting guides before an off-target check. Off-target specificity, base/prime editing, and HDR donors are separate skills.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Infer or annotate TCR antigen specificity by unsupervised clustering (TCRdist/tcrdist3, GLIPH2, clusTCR, GIANA) and database lookup (VDJdb, IEDB, McPAS-TCR), and rank candidates with supervised predictors (ERGO-II, NetTCR-2.x, pMTnet) under explicit caveats. Encodes the central truth that general TCR-epitope prediction for UNSEEN epitopes essentially does not work (collapses to near-random; IMMREP22, Grazioli 2022) because labeled data is dominated by a few immunodominant epitopes and there is no true negative set — so clustering for discovery is the honest task and de-novo binding needs wet-lab validation. Use when annotating TCR specificity or grouping a repertoire. Epitope/MHC context lives in mhc-binding-prediction.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Infers person-to-person transmission from pathogen genomes using outbreaker2 (Campbell 2018), TransPhylo (Didelot 2017), phybreak (Klinkenberg 2017), BadTrIP (De Maio 2018), SCOTTI (De Maio 2016), BEASTLIER (Hall 2015), and SNP-distance / cluster-picker approaches (HIV-TRACE for HIV; transcluster). Defines outbreak clusters using pathogen-specific SNP thresholds (NOT a universal cutoff -- TB <=12 SNPs / Walker 2013; MRSA <=15 / Coll 2017; C. difficile <=2 / Eyre 2013; Klebsiella <=21 / Snitkin 2012), models within-host diversity and transmission bottlenecks (Worby-Lipsitch-Hanage 2014; McCrone 2018; Sobel Leonard 2017; Lythgoe 2021 SARS-CoV-2), integrates contact-tracing data, distinguishes generation interval from serial interval (Britton & Scalia Tomba 2019; Ali 2020), attributes source via Bayesian source attribution (Mather 2013 DT104; islandR), and reconciles transmission-network reconstruction with epi metadata. Use when investigating outbreaks for who-infected-whom, defining SNP-cluster outbreak definitions, accounting for unsampled intermediates, choosing between outbreaker2 (rich epi data) and TransPhylo (genomic-only after dated phylogeny), running source attribution between host populations, calling HIV-TRACE thresholds appropriate to the local subtype, or distinguishing recent transmission from reactivation in TB / chronic HIV.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Analyzes CRISPR drug-modifier (chemogenomic) screens with drugZ (Li & Hart 2019 Genome Med), a bidirectional Z-score method that identifies synthetic-lethal sensitizing genes and resistance-conferring suppressor genes from vehicle vs drug comparisons. Covers vehicle-anchored design (not Day-0), the bidirectional Z math giving 2-3x sensitivity over MAGeCK / STARS / edgeR / RIGER on drug screens, per-gene sumZ and normZ, synth (sensitizer) vs supp (suppressor) FDR, multi-dose handling, integration with control sgRNAs, and comparison with MAGeCK MLE with dose covariate. Use when running a drug-modifier CRISPR screen, identifying sensitizing or resistance genes for a drug candidate, choosing drugZ vs MAGeCK MLE for chemogenomic analysis, troubleshooting low-effect drug screens where MAGeCK lacks sensitivity, or designing a drug-screen layout (vehicle vs drug arms).

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.