「root cause」の検索結果

Делает ревью продуктовых метрик — тренды, аномалии, root causes и рекомендации к действиям. Включает декомпозицию North Star (L1/L2), диагностику retention-кривых, анализ воронки, разбор A/B-экспериментов, проверку соответствия OKR и фреймворк атрибуции аномалий. User-invoked only — do NOT auto-trigger. Triggers on /pm-metrics, "обзор метрик", "разбор воронки", "анализ удержания", "ретеншн", "A/B результаты", "review metrics", "DAU analysis", "retention analysis", "funnel analysis", "metric anomaly".

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。

Triage a GitHub issue using diagnostics archives and logs. Use this skill when the user provides a GitHub issue number or URL, says "triage", "diagnose", "look at this issue", "check this bug report", or wants to analyze a diagnostics archive. Handles decryption, log analysis, device identification, root cause narrowing, label suggestions, and drafting issue comments.

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。

Flaky test fixes: detect nondeterministic tests empirically (repeat/shuffle/parallel runs), diagnose the root cause, fix it — never retry/skip/sleep — and verify across many randomized runs. Triggers on "absolute deflake", "fix flaky tests", "CI is flaky", "this test fails randomly/intermittently".

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。

Internal — for Boundless team members only. Cross-reference Boundless indexer API data, broker telemetry, and service logs to investigate production and staging operational issues. Use when the user wants to understand why slashings happened on prod/staging, diagnose prover or service failures in deployed environments, correlate market events with broker behavior, investigate fulfillment rate drops, look at prover/service logs, or perform any analysis that requires combining on-chain indexer data with off-chain broker telemetry and CloudWatch logs. Also use when the user asks to "investigate", "diagnose", or "find root cause" for prover, service, or market issues on live networks. Do NOT use for debugging local code changes, reviewing PRs, or investigating issues in the codebase itself.

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。

Analyze escaped defects and test suite health through blameless postmortems. Covers bug pattern analysis, test suite health reviews, 5 Whys root cause analysis, process improvement cycles, and postmortem/retro meeting templates with action item tracking. Use when: "QA retro," "escaped bugs," "postmortem," "quality incident," "defect analysis," "improvement cycle." Not for: live release go/no-go decisions — use release-readiness. Not for ongoing metric dashboards — use qa-metrics. Not for reviewing existing test code quality — use ai-qa-review. Related: qa-metrics, test-reliability, test-strategy.

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。

Root cause based one-shot bug fix. debugger diagnosis → requirements.md generation → /execute. /bugfix "error description" Full investigation pipeline: debugger + gap-analyzer + standard verify. QA suggestion after successful fix.

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。

Analyze indexed codebases via graph database (neug) and vector index (zvec). Covers call graphs, dependencies, dead code, hotspots, module coupling, architecture reports, semantic search, impact analysis, bug root cause from GitHub issues, class diagrams (UML), and PR review (risk scoring, conflict detection, auto-merge candidates, labeling). Also covers creating, inspecting, and repairing a CodeScope index. Use for: code structure, who calls what, why something changed, similar functions, module boundaries, bug tracing, class relationships, PR risk/conflicts, or any question benefiting from a code knowledge graph. Applies when a `.codegraph` index exists in the workspace, or when the user wants to create one.

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。

Analyze application error logs and monitoring platform exports (Sentry, Datadog, Rollbar) to identify error patterns, duplicates, and severity. Use when someone asks to "audit errors", "analyze exceptions", "find noisy alerts", "deduplicate error groups", or "triage production errors". Parses JSON/CSV error exports and produces categorized reports with root cause analysis.

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。

Refuses "flaky" as a diagnosis. Turns an intermittent failure into a reproduction by isolating it from the environment, naming the variable that controls it, forcing that variable, and measuring before and after with enough runs to count. Separates real defects from environment contention with evidence, and never retries to green or widens a threshold. Use when a test, performance check, or deploy step fails intermittently or passes on rerun.

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。

Captures reusable knowledge after work is done — learnings from feedback or failures, resolved bugs (symptom, root cause, prevention), and recurring code patterns — into the project's persistent memory file. Use after feedback, a non-trivial bug fix, a failed attempt, or the third repetition of a pattern.

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 strict code reviewer, pair programmer, debugger, and mentor for Python, Bash, Google Apps Script, JavaScript, and Swift/Apple platforms. Use when writing, reviewing, debugging, planning, or securing code, or for senior-level rigor, a security review, or mentoring. Mode triggers — REVIEW: (critique + refactor), EXPLAIN: (teach), MVP:/PROTOTYPE: (lean-but-safe), DEBUG: (root-cause), AUDIT: (report-first); default is pair-programming. Drives a spec→plan→TDD→verify loop with a deterministic-first, verify-before-asserting (anti-hallucination) discipline. Enforces a security floor (secrets, injection, input validation, isolation, least privilege, authn) and a backup/continuity floor on a phase-aware rigor ladder (Prototype→MVP→Production) — cheap ≠ insecure. Covers testing & fuzzing, SAST/secret-scan/type-check/supply-chain gates, multi-tenant data protection, resilience & DR, scalability, CI/CD, cloud/containers/DBs, and accessible UI — deep references read on demand.

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。

Convenes expert panels for problem-solving. Use when user mentions panel, experts, multiple perspectives, MECE, DMAIC, RAPID, Six Sigma, root cause analysis, strategic decisions, process improvement, or asks for philosophers/ancients (Socratic, Aristotelian, Stoic method experts).

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。

Investigate an unexplained defect or unexpected behavior without changing application code. Use for root-cause diagnosis and an evidence-backed handoff, including a bounded unresolved result. Not for implementing a known fix, new features, or explanation-only questions.

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。

Investigate an unexplained defect or unexpected behavior without changing application code. Use for root-cause diagnosis and an evidence-backed handoff, including a bounded unresolved result. Not for implementing a known fix, new features, or explanation-only questions.

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。

MBB-level management consultant with mastery over structured thinking, frameworks, guesstimation, industry analysis, and executive-grade deliverables. Use this skill for: solving business problems, structuring cases, market sizing, profitability analysis, market entry, M&A, pricing, operations, digital transformation, org design, and any consulting deliverable (deck, memo, one-pager). Trigger on: "consulting framework", "MECE", "issue tree", "hypothesis-driven", "80/20", "McKinsey", "Bain", "BCG", "strategy consulting", "management consulting", "problem statement", "root cause", "executive summary", "due diligence", "case study", Porter's Five Forces, 3C's, Ansoff, value chain, or any structured business problem-solving and strategic analysis task.

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。

Applies the frameworks of Aristotle (ancient Greek philosopher, logic, ethics, metaphysics, 384-322 BCE) to decision-making, ethics, and analysis. Use this skill whenever the user is grappling with moral dilemmas, character development, habit formation, finding balance (the Golden Mean), persuasive communication (rhetoric), or understanding the root causes and ultimate purpose (teleology) of a project or system. Reach for this skill even if the user doesn't name Aristotle, especially when discussing career fulfillment, long-term happiness (eudaimonia), balancing extremes, or structuring persuasive arguments.

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。

Find and repair unresolved root causes.

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 the user wants to know if something works — the answer requires running code, not analyzing it. Output is a verdict backed by evidence: passed, failed, or broken. Primary triggers: 'run the tests', 'does X still work after my change?', 'did the merge break anything?', 'verify the fix worked', 'check if the endpoint returns X', 'confirm nothing regressed', 'run tests/unit/test_foo.py', 'let me know the results', 'make sure my changes didn't break anything'. Hard stops — do NOT use for: reviewing test code for quality/coverage gaps, debugging why test infrastructure/databases/seed scripts are misbehaving, writing or fixing tests, diagnosing root causes of unexpected behavior. The deciding question: is the user asking for the result of executing something, or asking for help understanding/analyzing/improving something? If it's the latter, use diagnose or review-code instead.

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。

Four-phase debugging process - root cause first, then fix. Use when encountering bugs or unexpected 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。

Investigate a monitoring alert end-to-end. Pulls metrics, logs, traces, and recent code changes to identify root cause. Works with any monitoring MCP.

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。

Step 2 of debugging: reason about root cause based on observed symptoms.

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。

Auto-fix bugs. Observe symptom, find root cause, apply minimal fix, verify, explain in human terms.

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。

Validates a running application, CLI, API, service, or generated artifact as a user or operator against a prewritten observable behavior contract while remaining source-blind. Use for acceptance checks, runtime proof, anti-fake probes, release smoke tests, or an independent companion to code review. Not for source-quality findings, root-cause diagnosis, or visual design judgment outside the contract.

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。

Splits a coding task into independent parallel agent workstreams with disjoint write sets, explicit inputs and outputs, dependency ordering, and a merge/review plan. Use when several subtasks can proceed without shared mutable state. Not for tightly coupled edits, one failing root cause, or parallel changes to the same files.

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。