4,431 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Compress review pressure into the right next action instead of more code by default. Classify findings, reject non-liabilities, and choose proof-only vs minimal-fix vs refactor-kernel, preventing one-patch-per-comment churn. Use after a code review — PR comments, reviewer suggestions, or audit findings — and especially when you are about to reflexively patch every comment.
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。
Refine an existing skill in place with minimal diffs. Trigger when asked to improve a skill's trigger description/frontmatter, workflow text, metadata, scripts/references/assets; also for requests to iterate, refactor, rename, or fix a skill using usage/session-mining evidence (for example from /tw-seq).
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。
Refactor test files to improve behavioral coverage, clarity, structure, assertions, fixture setup, mocking strategy, and remove implementation-detail or low-value tests. Use when asked to clean up, declutter, consolidate, or improve tests.
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 'should never happen' into 'cannot happen' by defining owned inductive invariants and enforcing them at parse/construct/API/DB/lock/txn boundaries with a verification signal. Use when prompts mention invariants, impossible states, validation sprawl, cache/index drift, idempotency/versioning, retries/duplicates/out-of-order events, race/linearization bugs, loop correctness, or hardening another workflow (for example /tw-fix) with invariant checks 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。
Two-phase code quality skill: (1) review codebase for structural smells — file LOC, method LOC, accidental complexity, test readability — producing a structured report, then (2) fix all smells via provable refactorings with ACN micro commits and green-bar-at-all-times discipline. Use this skill when the user says 'sweep', 'code review', 'find code smells', 'check method lengths', 'review for complexity', 'tidy up the codebase', 'refactor smells', or asks about long methods, test readability, or accidental complexity. Also trigger when users ask to 'clean up' or 'improve code quality' across multiple 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。
Apply the 90/10 visual-to-text rule when composing a piece on a canvas (poster, card, social post). Use when the deliverable lives on a single fixed surface where each element competes for attention.
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。
Load when diagnosing a bug, exception, regression, wrong result, failing flow, or unknown root cause in repository code using callers/callees, execution flows, recent changes, and impact analysis; not for implementing a known fix without investigation.
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。
Resize and validate App Store screenshots with current asc screenshot-size data and macOS sips. Use when preparing or fixing screenshots for App Store Connect submission.
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。
Econometrics skill for Difference-in-Differences (DID) analysis. Activates when the user asks about: "difference in differences", "DID", "DiD", "diff-in-diff", "parallel trends", "treatment group", "control group", "pre-treatment", "post-treatment", "policy evaluation", "natural experiment", "staggered DID", "event study regression", "two-way fixed effects DID", "callaway santanna", "sun and abraham", "双重差分", "倍差法", "平行趋势", "处理组", "对照组", "政策评估", "事件研究", "交错DID", "渐进处理"
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。
Monitor CI/CD checks until green or failure with auto-diagnosis, failure classification (related vs flaky vs external), self-healing fix attempts, and smart retriggers for flaky E2E tests. Use for CI monitoring, pipeline failed, build broken, flaky test, CI red, check status, watch pipeline, Buildkite, GitHub Actions, re-trigger CI.
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。
Mojibake-Reparatur für doppelt/dreifach kodiertes UTF-8. Behebt Windows-cp1252/Latin-1-Fehlinterpretationen. Ohne Abhängigkeiten.
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。
Teststrategie-Berater für Softwareprojekte — wählt die richtigen Teststufen (Unit/Integration/System/Abnahme), Testarten (funktional, nicht-funktional, änderungsbezogen) und Testentwurfsverfahren (Äquivalenzklassen, Grenzwerte, Entscheidungstabellen, explorativ) für die jeweilige Situation und SDLC-/CI-Phase, inkl. Testpyramide, CI/CD-Gates, Shift-Left und Best Practices. Nutze diesen Skill IMMER, wenn Tests geschrieben, geplant, priorisiert oder bewertet werden sollen — bei "schreibe Tests", "Teststrategie", "Testplan", "Testkonzept", "was/wie soll ich testen", "welche Tests fehlen", "Testabdeckung verbessern", "QA aufsetzen", Fragen zu Regression/Smoke/Sanity/Last/Stress/Security-Tests oder beim Einrichten einer Test-Pipeline — auch wenn "Test" nur beiläufig fällt. Abgrenzung — für die TDD-Schleife selbst superpowers:test-driven-development, für Bug-Diagnose bugfix-protocol, für systematische Bug-Suche bugsweep nutzen.
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。
Converts a priced estimate spreadsheet into a DRAFT statement of work populated from the user's own SOW template, after checking that line items, hours, rates, subtotals and the grand total add up. Returns the populated SOW and a validation report as Markdown, flags every discrepancy and marks missing fields TBC. Use when the user asks to "turn this estimate into an SOW", "build the statement of work from the pricing workbook", "convert the quote into a scope document", "populate our SOW template from the estimate" or "draft the engagement document from the rate card". Do not use for reviewing or editing an existing SOW, use contract-review-pack instead; for a proposal before pricing is fixed use proposal-skeleton; for RFP or tender answers use rfp-response-drafter. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Reviews the text and structure of a document, slide deck or web page against the accessibility rules the user supplies, or a default set covering heading structure, image alternative text, colour used as the only cue, link text, reading order, tables and language, and returns numbered findings with location, rule, severity and a ready-to-apply fix for the author, plus proposed alt text and a list of checks that need a tool or a person. Use when the user asks to "check this document for accessibility", "review the alt text in this deck", "is this page accessible", "run an accessibility check on these slides", "find accessibility issues before I publish" or "check my headings and link text". Do not use for brand or template compliance of slides, use branded-deck-builder instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Reviews the instructions text and skills of a declarative agent, with its stated capabilities, knowledge sources and audience, for prompt-injection exposure, data-leakage paths, over-broad permissions and missing refusals, and returns an attack-surface map, a findings table with severity, quoted evidence and attack path, one pasteable fix per finding, a probe pack the owner can run and a refusal-coverage table. Use when the user asks to "red-team this agent", "check these instructions for prompt injection", "could this agent leak data", "review the permissions on my agent" or "what should this agent refuse". Do not use for checking a SKILL.md against the format rules, use skill-file-reviewer instead; do not use for designing the launch test set, use agent-evaluation-plan instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Builds a DRAFT content calendar for a stated period from the themes, channels, cadence rules, fixed dates and owners the user provides: one dated row per planned item with theme, channel, format, working title, owner, status and source, plus a cadence check with its arithmetic, theme balance, owner load and the slots left open. Use when the user asks to "build the content calendar for Q4", "lay these themes onto dates", "plan a month of posts across our channels", "extend the editorial calendar" or "check this calendar against our cadence". Do not use for deciding what the campaign says or why it runs, use campaign-brief-builder instead; for writing the items themselves, use announcement-drafter or internal-newsletter-drafter. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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 one knowledge article or known-error article from a resolved incident or ticket thread: symptoms as reported, environment, cause exactly as the resolver stated it, resolution steps as performed, workaround with its limits, verification, things tried without effect, related records, keywords and proposed metadata, every statement traced to a ticket note or marked UNKNOWN, with a redaction log and a question list for the knowledge owner. Never decides a root cause, adds a step or publishes. Use when the user asks to "write a KB article from this ticket", "turn this resolved incident into a knowledge article", "draft a known error record for this", "document the fix we just did" or "make this thread into a how-to for the service desk". Do not use for a procedure the team will execute (runbook, operating procedure, playbook), use runbook-drafter instead; for a post-incident review, use incident-postmortem-drafter. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Builds a DRAFT structured interview scorecard from a job description: five to eight competencies traced to it, past-behaviour and situational evidence questions with probes, four-level rating anchors written as observable behaviours, a blank scoring sheet, a panel plan and the items the hiring manager must confirm. Use when the user asks to "build an interview scorecard for this job description", "write competency questions for this role", "draft the interview guide for the panel", "set up a rating scale for the interviewers", "put together a structured interview kit" or "create a hiring rubric from the JD". Do not use for writing or fixing the job description itself, use job-description-drafter instead; for the new hire's first 90 days, use onboarding-plan-builder. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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 implementing features or fixing bugs with strict Test-Driven Development (TDD). Activate for coding tasks that require new functionality, refactoring, or comprehensive test coverage, especially when the user mentions TDD or 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。
Recall past work across Claude Code and Codex sessions. Finds decisions, research, fixes, and conversations by intent; with only a project and no question, orients on that project's recent state.
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。
Build an Anima LoRA from a single-character or style name, from Danbooru collection through curation, section-ordered WD14 captions, dataset checks, confirmed training, fixed-seed checkpoint validation, and a staged Civitai draft. Use for requests such as make a LoRA of X, collect images and train a character LoRA, train and upload to Civitai, or build a dataset from scratch and publish. Delegate training to lora-trainer and structural checks to dataset-doctor; never train without confirmation and never auto-publish.
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。
Explain a stack trace or error message and suggest concrete fixes.
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, debug and review code with focused checks. Use to fix a bug or failing test, refactor, remove code, perform a code review, or plan engineering work in repository records. Combine with UI for interface concerns and Plan for its native records. Excludes conceptual questions unrelated to a codebase.
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。
Self-test both Telegram rails on this machine, the MCP connector and the userbot library, with a deterministic zero-token detector plus a real in-session MCP probe, and print a per-rail verdict with the exact fix for whichever is down. Triggers: "/tg-check", "are both tg rails up", "check telegram channels".
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。