3,134 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Execute approved PWDEV Flow plans one atomic task at a time with test-first implementation, fresh verification, blocker handling, and durable evidence. Use after the plan gate is approved or for approved Flow correction tasks.
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。
Use before any creative work - creating a feature, building a component, adding functionality, or changing behavior - to explore intent and design before implementation
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。
Facilitate ideation, explore alternatives, and refine concepts through structured brainstorming techniques before implementation. Use when starting new projects, designing features, exploring solutions, evaluating tradeoffs, challenging assumptions, generating creative ideas, planning architecture, or refining rough concepts into detailed designs.
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。
Systematically review pull requests, feature implementations, and code changes to ensure quality, maintainability, security, and adherence to best practices. Use when reviewing code before merging, conducting peer reviews, performing self-reviews, auditing code quality, checking for security vulnerabilities, ensuring consistent coding standards, verifying test coverage, assessing performance implications, evaluating architectural decisions, or providing constructive feedback to improve team code quality.
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。
Roslyn-powered semantic query CLI for C# solutions. Use when you need to find references, callers, implementations, dependencies, members, or trace call chains in a C# codebase — replaces multi-round grep/read cycles with single precise queries.
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。
Review code changes against linked GitHub issue specs to catch implementation drift — building something plausible but wrong. Checks each acceptance criterion against actual code.
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。
Introduce the cross-section read interface boundary (I<Section>ServiceRead) for one section's service per memory/architecture/section-read-write-split.md. Audits the surface, evaluates which methods belong on the read interface, sets up the workspace, dispatches a subagent that introduces the interface and migrates non-section callers, opens a PR. Use when the user says 'read split for X', 'split <Section>Service', 'add I<Section>ServiceRead boundary', 'apply the section-read-write-split rule to <Section>', or any variation of carving the cross-section read surface out of a section's full service interface. Reference implementation is Teams (PR 678). Operates on one section per invocation.
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。
When the user wants to set up, improve, or audit analytics tracking and measurement. Also use when the user mentions "set up tracking," "GA4," "Google Analytics," "conversion tracking," "event tracking," "UTM parameters," "tag manager," "GTM," "analytics implementation," "tracking plan," "how do I measure this," "track conversions," "attribution," "Mixpanel," "Segment," "are my events firing," or "analytics isn't working." Use this whenever someone asks how to know if something is working or wants to measure marketing results. For A/B test measurement, see ab-test-setup.
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。
When the user wants to optimize content for AI search engines, get cited by LLMs, or appear in AI-generated answers. Also use when the user mentions 'AI SEO,' 'AEO,' 'GEO,' 'LLMO,' 'answer engine optimization,' 'generative engine optimization,' 'LLM optimization,' 'AI Overviews,' 'optimize for ChatGPT,' 'optimize for Perplexity,' 'AI citations,' 'AI visibility,' 'zero-click search,' 'how do I show up in AI answers,' 'LLM mentions,' or 'optimize for Claude/Gemini.' Use this whenever someone wants their content to be cited or surfaced by AI assistants and AI search engines. For traditional technical and on-page SEO audits, see seo-audit. For structured data implementation, see schema-markup.
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。
When the user wants to plan, design, or implement an A/B test or experiment. Also use when the user mentions "A/B test," "split test," "experiment," "test this change," "variant copy," "multivariate test," "hypothesis," "should I test this," "which version is better," "test two versions," "statistical significance," or "how long should I run this test." Use this whenever someone is comparing two approaches and wants to measure which performs better. For tracking implementation, see analytics-tracking. For page-level conversion optimization, see page-cro.
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。
Eng manager-mode plan review. Lock in the execution plan — architecture, data flow, diagrams, edge cases, test coverage, performance. Walks through issues interactively with opinionated recommendations. Use when asked to "review the architecture", "engineering review", or "lock in the plan". Proactively suggest when the user has a plan or design doc and is about to start coding — to catch architecture issues before implementation. (gstack) Voice triggers (speech-to-text aliases): "tech review", "technical review", "plan engineering 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。
Designer's eye plan review — interactive, like CEO and Eng review. Rates each design dimension 0-10, explains what would make it a 10, then fixes the plan to get there. Works in plan mode. For live site visual audits, use /design-review. Use when asked to "review the design plan" or "design critique". Proactively suggest when the user has a plan with UI/UX components that should be reviewed before implementation. (gstack)
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。
Designer's eye QA: finds visual inconsistency, spacing issues, hierarchy problems, AI slop patterns, and slow interactions — then fixes them. Iteratively fixes issues in source code, committing each fix atomically and re-verifying with before/after screenshots. For plan-mode design review (before implementation), use /plan-design-review. Use when asked to "audit the design", "visual QA", "check if it looks good", or "design polish". Proactively suggest when the user mentions visual inconsistencies or wants to polish the look of a live site. (gstack)
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。
Generate comprehensive technical documentation for developers taking over an AEM Edge Delivery Services project. Analyzes codebase structure, custom implementations, design tokens, and produces a complete developer guide.
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。
Orchestrate complete lifecycle work for the Adobe Dispatcher Apache HTTP Server module and related HTTPD configuration in AEM as a Cloud Service, from design and implementation through validation, release readiness, and incident troubleshooting.
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。
Implement custom AEM Workflow Java components on AEM as a Cloud Service. Use when writing WorkflowProcess steps, ParticipantStepChooser implementations, registering services via OSGi DS R6 annotations, reading step arguments from MetaDataMap, accessing JCR payload via WorkflowSession adapter, reading and writing workflow metadata and variables, and handling errors with WorkflowException for retry 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。
Guide for implementing code changes in AEM Edge Delivery Services. Handles block development (new or modified), core functionality changes (scripts.js, styles, delayed.js, etc.), or both. Use this skill for all implementation work guided by the content-driven-development workflow.
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。
Use when starting feature work that needs isolation from current workspace or before executing implementation plans - creates isolated git worktrees with smart directory selection and safety verification
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。
Break a plan, spec, or PRD into independently-grabbable issues on the project issue tracker using tracer-bullet vertical slices. Use when user wants to convert a plan into issues, create implementation tickets, or break down work into issues.
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。
Deep reasoning mode for complex problems requiring maximum cognitive depth. Use when facing difficult architectural decisions, complex debugging, multi-step problem solving, or situations requiring careful analysis before implementation.
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。
Review a Go design spec before implementation begins - dispatch a subagent that checks a design doc for completeness, consistency, and idiomatic Go (simplicity, small consumer-defined interfaces, explicit wrapped errors, context propagation) plus Cobra/Viper conventions where applicable. Use when a user has a Go spec to review, asks "is this spec ready?", or is about to implement from a written design. Distilled from spf13/go-skills and adapted to this repo's conventions.
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。
Ground framework-specific implementation in official documentation — detect stack versions, fetch authoritative docs, implement cited patterns, cite sources. Load when building with a library or framework where API correctness matters, when the user wants verified or documented code, or before writing framework code from memory. Also triggers on "source driven development", "cite the docs", "check official documentation", "verify against docs", "don't hallucinate APIs". Not for pure logic or renames. Pairs with feature-spec and test-driven-development.
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。
Orchestrator for spec-driven development (SDD) — the discipline of writing executable specs before code, with a constitution above them and a hard cross-check gate before implementation. Mirrors GitHub Spec Kit / AWS Kiro slash-command shape. Routes /constitution, /specify, /clarify, /plan, /tasks, /analyze, /implement to the right leaf skill. Load when the user says "spec-driven development", "SDD", "specs-first workflow", "run the spec loop", "/specify a feature", "/plan from this spec", "do spec-driven for this", "GitHub Spec Kit workflow", "Kiro workflow", or invokes any SDD-style slash command. Single entry point for all SDD workflows.
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。
Evaluate any project, product, or system's claims against its actual implementation — scoring each claim for truth, identifying architectural gaps, assessing competitive positioning, proposing creative solutions, and producing an actionable roadmap. Load when the user asks to evaluate claims, reality-check a project, assess what this project actually does vs what it says, validate product claims, or score a system's credibility. Also triggers on "is this real", "does this work as claimed", "evaluate this project", "assess the gap between claims and reality", "how credible is this", "investor assessment", "score these claims", or "what's real vs marketing".
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。