「prd」の検索結果

5-phase planning: PRD analysis, design review, technical decisions, dynamic research team, metrics. Produces a complete implementation plan + ADRs before any code is written.

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。

A structured workflow for co-authoring high-signal docs (PRD, RFC, design docs, proposals, decision records). Use when the user needs to turn messy context into a readable artifact with clear goals, tradeoffs, and next steps. Emphasizes context capture, outline-first drafting, and context-free reader testing to catch blind spots.

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。

Frame a new design proposal (RFC-shape) under proposals/ — problem before solution, named beneficiary and observable change, real alternatives, honest drawbacks, and a live open-questions backlog. Read when asked to frame a proposal, write an RFC, propose a design, pitch a change, draft a PRD-style design doc, or open a design proposal for review. Do NOT read to record a decision after it is accepted (use record-a-decision), to write an implementation spec (use write-a-spec), to write a postmortem (use write-a-postmortem), or to review or critique an existing design (use review-a-design).

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。

Activate for changes to project positioning, release communication, community-facing artifacts, or breaking-change decisions in microsoft/apm. Triggers on README, MANIFESTO, PRD, CHANGELOG, release workflows, and issue templates.

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。

Scan a repo for mixed ADRs, PRDs, SPECs, and DOCs and bootstrap or merge the full .planning/ setup from them. Classifies each doc in parallel, synthesizes a consolidated context with a conflicts report, and routes to new-project or merge-milestone depending on whether .planning/ already exists.

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。

[omh] Unvalidated early product idea: test whether a customer problem, segment, and business hypothesis deserve product investment, ending in kill, pivot, persevere, or inconclusive before any PRD. Use when the user says: product-discovery-validation, product discovery validation, product discovery, customer discovery, customer discovery plan, zero to one validation, validate the problem before building, problem solution interview.

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。

Write or revise an MVP product requirements document with scope and observable acceptance criteria.

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。

Entry point and router for every Expo or EAS task. Load this skill first — before writing code and before choosing another expo-* / eas-* skill — when the request, PRD, or spec mentions Expo, EAS, Expo Go, or an expo-* package, or the project has an `expo` dependency in `package.json`. Within that gate it also covers app specs and designs to implement (tabs, stacks, maps, lists, navigation, building from a screenshot), and phrasings like 'implement a mobile app', 'make my app look native', 'add navigation', 'fetch some data', 'upgrade my SDK', 'add Expo to my existing native app', 'ship to the App Store', or 'I'm new to Expo, where do I start'. A fully specified request (SDK pinned, libraries named, layout given) still routes through here — the shared setup rules still apply. Do NOT load it when neither signal is present: a bare React Native project with no `expo` dependency is not Expo work. Detects the real goal, routes to the right expo-* / eas-* skill, and owns the shared setup rules.

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 users through a structured workflow for co-authoring documentation. Use when user wants to write documentation, proposals, technical specs, decision docs, PRDs, RFCs, or similar structured content. This workflow helps users efficiently transfer context, refine content through iteration, and verify the doc works for readers. Trigger when user mentions writing docs, creating proposals, drafting specs, or similar documentation 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。

Requirements authoring guide for BRD and PRD across Discover, Define, and Govern with canonical templates and handoff contracts

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。

Specify an autonomous or tool-using AI agent before building it. Use when asked to design an AI agent, define an agent's tools and guardrails, scope what an agent is allowed to do, or write an agent spec/PRD. Produces an agent spec — goal & scope, tools with permissions, the control loop, guardrails & approval gates, memory, escalation/handoff, evaluation, and failure handling.

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 skill's recommendations into real, executed actions — open the tickets, file the issues, post the updates — safely: dry-run preview, risk-classified, approval-gated, then recorded back to the brain. Use when asked to act on a plan, file tickets from a checklist, create issues from a PRD, execute the recommended next steps, or wire a skill's output into GitHub/Linear/Slack. Produces a dry-run actions plan with per-action risk, executes only after approval via the connected action MCP, and logs what was done. Nothing acts silently.

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。

Help users transform abstract ideas into actionable project specs that align engineering and design teams on the problem and success metrics.

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。

Plan a feature or initiative through a computed route: the conductor derives the canon delta and assembles the document package — from a zero-document null route for small fixes to an umbrella PRD with one spec per capability for large initiatives. Modes, named as the first word: sdd (full package), sources (MRD → BRD → URD) for market research, customer discovery, and business or user requirements, iso (BRS → StRS → SyRS → SRS) for ISO 29148 and regulated work, research for a technical investigation — never market research — that the research instrument closes either by scope coverage (a research document) or by a recommendation (an rnd). Explicit form: plan research <topic>. Use for 'plan the X redesign', 'create a roadmap', 'plan a new feature', 'I need market research before we plan', 'we're regulated — start the ISO requirements cascade', 'investigate X before we plan', 'compare the alternatives for Y' — a new investigation, not a finished report already in hand. Not for recording a decision or documenting existing code — use /archcore:document. Not for checking docs against code — use /archcore: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。

Record a decision, document existing code, or file a supplied research material. Modes: document decision (ADR, RFC, or rule), document code (spec, doc, guide, or scenario for existing behavior), document research (only when a finished report or one external material is already in hand). Use for 'we decided', 'record this decision', 'document why we chose X', 'make it our standard', 'draft an RFC', 'should we switch to Y' proposals, 'resolve the RFC', 'we accepted the proposal', 'document the auth module', 'capture how the payment system works', reference material, how-to instructions, or a user flow with examples over an existing spec. Name any document type inside the subject — journey, prd, idea, or cpat included — to get exactly that type. Planning a feature or an unnamed intended user journey → /archcore:plan. Checking docs against code or docs health → /archcore: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。

Generate product requirements documents with optional publishing to Confluence or other wiki platforms

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。

Tests genotype-environment associations and identifies adaptive loci while correcting for the four-confound landscape (structure, demography, background selection, sampling design) using LFMM2 with mandatory K via sNMF cross-entropy elbow (LEA 3), BayPass Core/AUX/C2/IS with Omega covariance matrix, RDA / pRDA for polygenic adaptation (Forester 2018; requires imputed genotypes), OutFLANK with trimmed FST null, pcadapt, gradient forests (Ellis-Smith-Pitcher 2012, NOT mis-cited Ellis-Manel), Capblancq & Forester 2021 RDA Swiss-army-knife, genomic-offset prediction with Lind & Lotterhos 2025 three-regime caveat, Lotterhos-Whitlock sampling optima, Wang & Bradburd 2014 IBD vs IBE, and Circuitscape + ResistanceGA. Use when identifying adaptive loci across gradients, choosing K for LFMM2, deciding among GEA methods, predicting maladaptation with the novel-environment caveat, distinguishing IBD vs IBE, or optimizing sampling design.

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。

Controls error rates across thousands of simultaneous tests in genomics discovery using false-discovery-rate methods (Benjamini-Hochberg 1995; Benjamini-Yekutieli 2001 for arbitrary dependence; Storey q-value with pi0 estimation; local FDR; independent filtering Bourgon 2010; covariate-weighted FDR via IHW Ignatiadis 2016), plus family-wise error control (Bonferroni, Holm) and the GWAS genome-wide threshold. Covers the FDR-versus-FWER choice as the discovery-versus-confirmatory distinction, the dependence assumptions behind BH (PRDS) versus BY, pi0 estimation, the independent-filtering and false-coverage-rate traps, and reproducibility ranking via IDR (Li 2011). Use when correcting p-values from genome-wide tests, choosing between BH/BY/q-value/Bonferroni, setting an FDR threshold, applying IHW or independent filtering, or interpreting q-values. For confirmatory trials with few pre-specified endpoints (closed testing, graphical/gatekeeping), see clinical-biostatistics/multiplicity-graphical.

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。

Implements multiplicity control for confirmatory clinical trials using graphical procedures (Bretz-Maurer-Hommel), gatekeeping (parallel, serial, mixed), Hochberg/Hommel/Holm with PRDS, and the closed-testing principle (Marcus-Peritz-Gabriel; Goeman 2021 admissibility). Covers FDA Multiple Endpoints Final Guidance (October 2022), graphical procedures via R gMCP, primary + key-secondary + subgroup hierarchies, and FWER vs FDR distinction. Use when designing the multiplicity strategy for confirmatory trials with multiple primary or key secondary endpoints.

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。

Create or update implementation plans in the repo's SIMPLE or COMPLEX format. Use when turning an idea, PRD, or approved direction into a saved plan artifact.

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。

Define the smallest first version worth building (the MVP scope) from a PRD through a guided interview, with the AI Product Development Toolkit's MVP scope prompt.

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 PRD into UX specifications (screens, user flows and interaction patterns) through a guided interview, with the AI Product Development Toolkit's UX prompt.

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。

Plan the MVP build from a PRD and an MVP scope, as a full development plan or an ultra-lean build spec, with the AI Product Development Toolkit's planning prompts.

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。

Plan a user research questionnaire, or turn collected responses into evidence-linked input for a PRD, with the AI Product Development Toolkit's research prompts.

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。