'complexity' 검색 결과

Cross-border e-commerce expansion advisor. Scores target markets on 8 weighted dimensions (market size, ecommerce penetration, competition, regulatory complexity, logistics infrastructure, payment ecosystem, cultural distance, IP protection), compares 5 fulfillment models with cost and transit data, provides country-by-country tax/duty compliance guides (EU VAT/IOSS, UK VAT, US sales tax, CA GST, AU GST, JP consumption tax), maps local payment preferences by market, and builds a phased expansion roadmap. No API key required.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Optional design-improvement pass for when you have spare usage to drain. Finds the shallowest modules in the code the spec touches, researches a deeper design, and proposes refactors that shrink interfaces and hide decisions — behavior held constant, tests green before and after. Proposes §I/§V/§T edits, never silent rewrites. Triggers when the user says "deepen this", "improve the design", "this module feels shallow", "pull complexity down", "use spare budget on the codebase", or invokes /ck:deepen. Leans on the codebase-design skill's deep-module vocabulary when present.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Apply systematic problem-solving techniques when stuck. Use for complexity spirals, innovation blocks, recurring patterns, assumption constraints, simplification cascades, scale uncertainty.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Create a workflow-intelligence report from CCAM orchestration, delegation, tool flow, concurrency, complexity, compaction, and fleet-run data. Use for architecture reviews, agent-fleet analysis, or workflow optimization reports.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Calculate a productivity score using actual Agent Monitor metrics — session completion rates, cache efficiency (cache_read vs input), compaction pressure (baseline tokens), turn velocity (turn_count / total_turn_duration_ms), tool success ratio (PreToolUse vs PostToolUse), and the workflow intelligence API's complexity and effectiveness scores.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Compare two sessions side-by-side using Agent Monitor data — per-model token usage (input/output/cache_read/cache_write + compaction baselines), pricing engine cost breakdowns, workflow intelligence (complexity scores, tool flow transitions, subagent effectiveness), session metadata (thinking_blocks, turn_count, turn_duration_ms, usage_extras), and full event timelines with all 10+ event types.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Identify anomalous sessions using Agent Monitor data — cost outliers from the pricing engine, token anomalies (cache miss spikes, compaction baseline surges), unusual event type ratios (PreToolUse/PostToolUse gaps, APIError clusters), behavioral deviations from workflow intelligence (complexity score outliers, error propagation anomalies), and sessions with abnormal metadata (extreme turn_count, high thinking_blocks, zero turn_duration).

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Benchmark one session (or a small recent set) against the rolling average using Agent Monitor data — cost, total tokens, tool count, and workflow complexity score — and report where each metric lands as a percentile of the population. Tells you whether a session was normal, cheap, or an outlier. Use when judging whether a session was typical or out of band.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Iterative measurement-driven improvement loop. Measure, profile, mutate, re-measure, commit. Works for performance, bundle size, complexity, test coverage — anything quantifiable. Use when the user wants to systematically improve a metric through repeated cycles of profiling and targeted changes.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Code review automation for TypeScript, JavaScript, Python, Go, Swift, and Kotlin. Analyzes PRs for complexity, risk, SOLID violations, and code smells. Use when reviewing PRs, analyzing code quality, or generating review checklists.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Analyze codebase health metrics including complexity and dependencies

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Design structured perspective-taking activities with anti-projection guardrails. Develops genuine understanding of complexity across history, social sciences, and literature — not performed empathy.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Adapt a historical primary source for classroom use — modifying complexity and length while preserving features for sourcing, close reading, and corroboration. Use when a primary source is too complex for the target age group.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Framework for demonstrating AI capabilities in legal contexts. Provides detailed personas across tenant law, business contracts, startup disputes, employment claims, and consumer protection with progressive complexity scenarios. Use when: (1) Demonstrating AI-powered legal triage or intake systems, (2) Showcasing responsible AI-assisted client interactions, (3) Training staff on appropriate AI use in legal contexts, (4) Creating realistic scenarios for legal tech presentations, (5) Developing educational materials about AI in legal services, or (6) Testing AI-powered legal information systems in controlled environments.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Audits legal AI outputs and workflows for honest compression: unnecessary complexity, false simplicity, excessive caveats, hidden uncertainty and poor cost per legally acceptable output.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Firm-matter matching, matter instruction drafting, firm onboarding checklist, and instruction audit for in-house legal ops teams. Match a new matter to the right panel firm by practice area, jurisdiction, complexity, and cost tier. Produce a structured matter instruction with scope, timeline, budget, staffing, and reporting requirements. Generate an onboarding checklist covering conflict clearance, engagement letter, OCG acknowledgment, e-billing setup, and platform access. Audit an existing instruction for completeness and produce a remediation note. Trigger on: 'which firm should handle this', 'instruct the firm', 'write the instruction', 'matter instruction template', 'onboard the firm', 'set up the matter', 'conflict check', 'e-billing setup', 'is our instruction complete', 'review our instruction', 'instruction gap', 'allocate this matter'.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Gate test coverage with a ratchet — a committed baseline that coverage may never drop below and only ever rises. Ships a coverage-gate script (xccov-based) plus an advisory CRAP report (complexity × uncovered). Use when agent-written code needs a deterministic "tests were actually written" check.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Systematically remove one harness component at a time and measure impact, killing scaffolding that no longer earns its complexity.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Phase 2 of the prd-taskmaster pipeline: spec generation and task parsing. Loads a template (comprehensive|minimal), fills it with DISCOVER-phase constraints and answers, validates the spec (placeholders_found, grade thresholds), parses the PRD into tasks via task-master, runs TaskMaster's native complexity analysis, and expands every task into verifiable subtasks. Autonomous-safe. Declares GENERATE complete so HANDOFF can follow.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Clean-code engineering standards for writing, refactoring, and reviewing code in any programming language. Use this whenever the user asks to write clean code, follow clean-code principles, refactor for clarity, improve naming, reduce complexity or duplication, separate concerns, tighten error handling, work test-first or do TDD, or otherwise raise code quality, readability, and maintainability. Also use when writing or reviewing Operately APIs or Ecto queries. Apply these rules by default when producing or changing code for a quality-conscious user.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Design or improve module interfaces using deep-module heuristics. Use when deciding where a seam belongs, reducing caller-facing complexity, improving testability or navigability, or comparing module designs.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Enforce universal standards for high-performance development. Use when profiling bottlenecks, reducing latency, fixing memory leaks, improving throughput, or optimizing algorithm complexity in any language.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Scores a coding task on Spread, Novelty, and Centrality (SNC 0-6) and maps the tier to autonomy, verification depth, review mode, reviewers, model tier. Use when sizing a fix or feature before planning, choosing fast vs deep review, or deciding whether HARD STOP approval is required.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Enforce SOLID principles, guard-clause style, function size limits, and intention-revealing naming across all languages. Use when refactoring for readability, applying clean-code patterns, reviewing naming conventions, or reducing function complexity.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.