「challenge」の検索結果

CEO/founder-mode plan review. Rethink the problem, find the 10-star product, challenge premises, expand scope when it creates a better product. Three modes: SCOPE EXPANSION (dream big), HOLD SCOPE (maximum rigor), SCOPE REDUCTION (strip to essentials).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

CEO/founder-mode scope review. Challenges the scope of any plan, workflow, or feature before execution. Four modes: SCOPE EXPANSION (dream bigger), SELECTIVE EXPANSION (cherry-pick worthwhile expansions), HOLD SCOPE (maximum rigor within current scope), SCOPE REDUCTION (strip to essentials). Use before executing any multi-step workflow or when questioning whether the scope is right. Prevents scope creep and missed opportunities. Use proactively when the user defines a plan, creates a workflow, or says "is this enough?" or "am I thinking too small?".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

ADHD-friendly life management assistant for OpenClaw. Helps with daily planning, task breakdown, time management, prioritization, body doubling, dopamine regulation, and maintaining routines. Use when the user asks for help organizing their life, staying on top of tasks, beating procrastination, planning their day/week, managing overwhelm, or mentions ADHD-related challenges like time blindness, forgetfulness, difficulty starting tasks, or emotional dysregulation.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Run an explicitly requested, unusually strict dygo maintainability audit that seeks structural simplification, removes accidental complexity, and challenges weak abstractions without changing behavior.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Grilling session that challenges your plan against the existing domain model, sharpens terminology, and updates documentation (CONTEXT.md, ADRs) inline as decisions crystallise. Use when user wants to stress-test a plan against their project's language and documented decisions.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

方案拷问 / 压力测试：当用户有一个产品方案、架构设计、计划或决策，想被连续追问、反方挑战、 压测取舍和失败模式时使用。可用中文唤起：“拷问我的方案”“压力测试这个设计”“帮我问 hard questions” “这个方案哪里会翻车”“grill me”。目标是一问一答把决策树走清楚，不是直接替用户写最终方案。 跨 Skill 运行时只输出 Challenge/Critic Handoff，并把一个 gap 返回最小责任节点；不重写完整方案。 如果用户还不知道真正问题是什么，先用 ai-collaboration-calibration；如果用户要标准 PRD 交付准备度评审， 用 prd-review。

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Grilling session that challenges your plan against the existing domain model, sharpens terminology, and updates documentation (CONTEXT.md, ADRs) inline as decisions crystallise. Use when user wants to stress-test a plan against their project's language and documented decisions.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

CEO/founder-mode plan review. Rethink the problem, find the 10-star product, challenge premises.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Drafts a Motion for Bail Reduction for criminal defense pretrial proceedings. Argues current bail is excessive under the Eighth Amendment using defendant financial circumstances, community ties, and flight-risk factors adapted to jurisdictional bail standards. Use when seeking bail modification, bail reduction, pretrial release, or excessive bail challenges.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

CEO/founder-mode plan review: rethink the problem, find the 10x product, challenge premises, expand scope. Four modes, dream-big to strip-to-essentials. Use to rethink ambition or scope.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

CEO/founder-mode plan review. Rethink the problem, find the 10-star product, challenge premises, expand scope when it creates a better product. Four modes: SCOPE EXPANSION (dream big), SELECTIVE EXPANSION (hold scope + cherry-pick expansions), HOLD SCOPE (maximum rigor), SCOPE REDUCTION (strip to essentials). Use when asked to "think bigger", "expand scope", "strategy review", "rethink this", or "is this ambitious enough". Proactively suggest when the user is questioning scope or ambition of a plan, or when the plan feels like it could be thinking bigger. Use AFTER a plan exists. For validating the idea itself before planning, use /mk:office-hours first.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Turn a raw idea into ONE honest recommendation: interview one question at a time until the problem, requirements, goals, non-goals, and constraints are CONFIRMED, then deliver a single verdict — do, don't, cheaper alternatives, trade-offs, ordered checklist, success metrics. Required: the user wants exactly ONE recommendation — not options, not a debate — and their framing is open to challenge (advise may answer a different question than the one asked). Triggers on "what should I do about X", "advise me on X", "am I approaching this right", "is this the right move". Do NOT use to be interrogated with no recommendation (→ mk:grill) — advise also interviews one question at a time, but only to reach a verdict. Do NOT use when the framing is settled and only the options are open (→ mk:brainstorming). Do NOT use to decide whether something is worth building (→ mk:office-hours). Do NOT use when you want several perspectives to argue it out (→ mk:party).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Develop, challenge, and document Chisel processor microarchitecture designs before implementation. Use when discussing or writing design documents for processor pipelines, queues, issue logic, rename, ROB, LSU, caches, MSHRs, forwarding, wakeup, replay, flush, privilege, exceptions, or other cycle-accurate hardware mechanisms; when converting design conversations into stable Markdown specifications; or when reviewing a proposed Chisel CPU design for correctness, timing, area, verification cost, and cross-document consistency.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Judge board subskill for simmer. Dispatches a panel of judges with different lenses, runs one deliberation round where they challenge each other's scores, then synthesizes consensus scores + single ASI. Drop-in replacement for simmer-judge that produces identical output format. Do not invoke directly — dispatched by the simmer orchestrator when JUDGE_MODE is board.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Autonomous agents are AI systems that can independently decompose goals, plan actions, execute tools, and self-correct without constant human guidance. The challenge isn't making them capable - it's making them reliable. Every extra decision multiplies failure probability.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Call this skill when faced with "wicked problems", complex challenges, or when a user asks for strategic innovation, root-cause analysis, or long-term problem solving. Do not use for simple, linear tasks. This skill forces the agent to bypass superficial symptoms, map the entire ecosystem, and anticipate second-order consequences before proposing an intervention.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Apply hierarchical decomposition and structural exploitation strategies from DAG theory to complex system design, problem-solving, and abstraction challenges

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Prepare for Anthropic-specific technical interviews covering Constitutional AI, RLHF, interpretability, scaling laws, MCP, agentic systems, and AI safety. Activate on "anthropic interview", "constitutional AI prep", "alignment interview", "safety interview", "RLHF opinion", "interpretability prep", "anthropic technical". NOT for general ML interview prep, system design interviews, coding challenges, or behavioral interview practice.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Evaluates likelihood of primary aldosteronism by measuring plasma aldosterone suppression after oral captopril; normal suppression ≥30% makes PA unlikely, while lack of suppression with persistently suppressed plasma renin activity suggests PA. Use when assessing captopril challenge test (CCT) results for PA diagnosis in patients with positive aldosterone-to-renin ratio.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Grilling session that challenges your plan against the existing domain model, sharpens terminology, and updates documentation (CONTEXT.md, ADRs) inline as decisions crystallise. Use when user wants to stress-test a plan against their project's language and documented decisions.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

[Process] Use when the developer wants something explained or taught, or wants to know HOW TO REVIEW a change — by default the current working tasks + changes in context, or whatever the prompt names (a plan, a subsystem, a decision, a concept, a bug). AI derives WHAT to explain from the prompt and ALWAYS delivers a teacher-and-coach review guide, high level first then detail: what was done, a VISUAL MAP (system flowchart, domain ERD, sequence diagrams), the user stories and business rules with their REAL test-case IDs, a REVIEW PATH naming which files to open first and in what order with an exit criterion per stage, the technical concepts needed to follow it, how it works, why THIS solution, every alternative option with pros/cons, the trade-offs accepted, the blast radius, HOW TO TEST AND DEMO the change, the developer's decision levers, and written challenge prompts that provoke the reader to pressure-test the work. Works at ANY scope — from one line of code to the whole project: it SIZES the target into a scope tier, DECOMPOSES a large one into understanding groups, BREAKS the work into tasks before the first deep read, and ACCUMULATES the report group by group on disk so a huge explanation stays complete instead of thinning out. Writes the full report to a single combined markdown file (plans/reports/understand-*.md) that opens with a detailed summary section — or delivers it in full in chat when Step 3 finds no git-ignored directory for it — and always summarizes it in chat. Regardless of coding level. Never interrogates, never quizzes, never blocks.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

[Code Quality] Use when you need an AI-assisted Dev BA PIC review of PBI drafts.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

挑戦宣言と企画を作りたいとき、目的・目標・挑戦・リスク回避5理由・行うこと5つ・定期報告を北原さんのナレッジを使った引き出し型の対話で言語化し提出用テキストに仕上げたいときに使う。

Gauntlet for absolute claims (always/never/guaranteed/optimal); pressure-test, then refine with explicit boundaries. Use when users ask to prove or disprove strong certainty claims, request devil's-advocate challenge rounds, or want the /tw-prove-it gauntlet to run all 10 rounds continuously by default.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。