「diff」の検索結果

Proteina-Complexa flow-based protein backbone generation with fold-conditioned sampling guidance. Use this skill when: (1) Generating de novo protein backbones with hierarchical fold conditioning, (2) Exploring long-chain backbone generation beyond standard diffusion baselines, (3) Using NVIDIA Proteina-style flow matching workflows for controllable backbone design, (4) Comparing flow-based backbone generation against RFdiffusion or BoltzGen, (5) Prototyping fold-guided backbone campaigns before sequence design. This skill is based on the public NVIDIA Digital Bio Proteina project and uses "Proteina-Complexa" as the BioClaw-facing skill label. For sequence design after backbone generation, use proteinmpnn or solublempnn. For QC thresholds, use protein-design-qc.

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。

Design protein sequences using ProteinMPNN inverse folding. Use this skill when: (1) Designing sequences for RFdiffusion backbones, (2) Redesigning existing protein sequences, (3) Fixing specific residues while designing others, (4) Optimizing sequences for expression or stability, (5) Multi-state or negative design. For backbone generation, use rfdiffusion or bindcraft. For ligand-aware design, use ligandmpnn. For solubility optimization, use solublempnn.

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。

End-to-end binder design using BindCraft hallucination. Use this skill when: (1) Designing protein binders with built-in AF2 validation, (2) Running production-quality binder campaigns, (3) Using different design protocols (fast, default, slow), (4) Need joint backbone and sequence optimization, (5) Want high experimental success rate. For backbone-only generation, use rfdiffusion. For QC thresholds, use protein-qc. For tool selection guidance, use binder-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。

Generate AI-friendly repository documentation with the SourceSage CLI. Use when Codex needs to run `sage` or `sourcesage` to create `.SourceSageAssets/Repository_summary.md`, analyze the current repository or another local repository, switch the output language between English and Japanese, use `--lite` to keep the summary small, change the output directory, or optionally create a deprecated tag-diff release report with `--diff`.

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 competitors with strengths, weaknesses, and differentiation opportunities. Identifies direct competitors and maps the competitive landscape. Use when doing competitive research, preparing a competitive brief, or finding differentiation opportunities.

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 what a change could break somewhere else before it ships, beyond the diff, and prove the one fact it's safe because of by running real code instead of writing it up. Use for 'blast radius of X', 'what could this break', or reviewing a small diff you don't trust.

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。

Rebuilds an existing website as a clean new codebase that looks and behaves like the original: captures pages, breakpoints, design tokens, assets and interaction states with a browser tool, plans the build, rebuilds section by section and proves each one against the capture with a pixel diff. Use when the user says "clone this website", "rebuild my site in Next.js or Astro", "recreate this page pixel-perfect", "move my Webflow or WordPress site to code" or "copy this layout". Full copies are only for sites the user owns or is authorized to copy; for anyone else's site it borrows the layout ideas and never the brand, content or sign-in pages.

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。

Chromatic is a visual testing service from the Storybook team that snapshots every story in a cloud browser and shows visual diffs for review on each pull request. Use when the user wants visual regression testing with Storybook, or mentions "chromatic," "visual regression," "Storybook testing," "UI review," "visual diff," or "component snapshot testing." For general screenshot comparison, see percy.

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。

Feature-rich Stable Diffusion Web UI for image generation. Supports txt2img, img2img, inpainting, outpainting, LoRA, extensions, upscaling, and batch processing. Widely used desktop interface with an extensive extension ecosystem and API access.

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。

The specialized craft of writing copy that sells—headlines that stop thumbs, body copy that persuades, CTAs that convert. This is copywriting specifically tuned for advertising: paid media, performance marketing, direct response. Ad copy is different from content writing. Every word costs money (CPM/CPC). Every character competes for attention. There's no time for warm-up—you have one chance to hook, persuade, and convert. The best ad copy feels effortless but is engineered word by word. In the age of AI-generated creative at scale, ad copywriting becomes both more important (you need more variations) and more challenging (everyone has access to the same tools). The differentiation is in the strategy, the insight, and the craft that AI assists but doesn't replace. Use when "ad copy, headline, ad text, CTA, call to action, Facebook ad, Google ad, ad variations, direct response, performance copy, primary text, ad headline, ad-copy, headlines, direct-response, performance, conversion, cta, advertising" mentioned.

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。

Master AI-powered game asset pipelines using ComfyUI, Stable Diffusion, FLUX, ControlNet, and IP-Adapter. Creates production-ready sprites, textures, UI, and environments with consistency, proper licensing, and game engine integration. Use when "AI game art, generate game assets, ComfyUI game, stable diffusion sprites, AI texture generation, character consistency AI, procedural art generation, SDXL game assets, FLUX textures, train LoRA game, AI tileable texture, spritesheet generation, " mentioned.

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。

Extracts and records architectural decisions from diffs, conversation context, and explicit choices. Supports automatic extraction from staged changes, deduplication against prior decisions, and persistent ADR-format logging with spec traceability. Use after a significant design or architecture choice, before committing a diff that embeds implicit decisions, or when the same question keeps resurfacing.

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。

游戏设计 (Game Design) — 设计游戏的规则 / 系统 / 机制 / 体验 的从业者认知操作系统 (以电子游戏为主, 含桌游 / 卡牌 / 棋盘游戏): 决定「玩家做什么、为什么有意义、每一刻的体验如何」的学科 —— 区别于游戏程序 (引擎 / 代码)、游戏美术 (视觉 / 音频)、游戏制作 (排期 / 预算 / 团队)。覆盖 (a) 核心设计理论与框架 (MDA 机制-动态-美学 Hunicke/LeBlanc/Zubek + Schell 的「透镜」+ Koster「乐趣即学习」理论 + Sid Meier「一连串有趣的决策」+ Salen & Zimmerman「有意义的游玩」/「二阶设计」/「魔法圈」+ Costikyan 论不确定性 + Suits/Huizinga 游戏哲学), (b) 系统与机制设计 (核心循环 + 游戏经济 sink/source/产出-消耗 + 正负反馈环 + 资源与成长系统 + 涌现 vs 脚本 Will Wright「可能性空间」+ Machinations 经济建模 Dormans + 支配 / 退化策略 + 正交设计 Garfield), (c) 关卡与遭遇设计 (灰盒 blockout + 节奏与张力 + 预告 telegraphing + 主线 vs 探索 + 环境叙事 + 锁钥 gating + 难度曲线), (d) 游戏手感与「juice」(Steve Swink《Game Feel》+ 即时响应 + 屏震 / 反馈 / 打磨 + 输入与镜头 + 「手感」是设计出来的不是附带的), (e) 玩家心理与 UX (Celia Hodent《The Gamer's Brain》+ 心流通道 挑战 vs 技能 Csikszentmihalyi/陈星汉 Jenova Chen + Bartle 玩家类型 + 动机与奖励节奏 + 新手引导 FTUE / 教学化 + 认知负荷 + 无障碍), (f) 平衡与调优 (Ian Schreiber《Game Balance》+ 对称 / 非对称 + 动态难度 DDA + 传递 / 非传递平衡 + nerf/buff + 消除支配策略 + 测试驱动调优), (g) 叙事与任务设计 (ludonarrative 失调 / 和谐 + 环境与系统叙事 + 分支 vs 线性 + Amy Hennig 角色驱动 + 任务结构), (h) 以玩家为中心的迭代流程 (Tracy Fullerton《Game Design Workshop》playcentric + 纸面原型 + 垂直切片 + 测试协议「看而不说 / 你不是你的玩家」+ 快速迭代 + game jam), (i) 类型与形态工艺 (roguelike/roguelite 与程序生成 Derek Yu + 平台跳跃 + RPG 系统 + 策略 4X + 解谜设计 Jonathan Blow + 多人 / PvP 平衡 + 桌游 / 卡牌设计 Reiner Knizia/Richard Garfield/Brenda Romero), (j) F2P / 长线运营 / 商业化设计 (核心 / 元 / 经济循环 + 抽卡 gacha / 开箱 loot box / 战令 battle pass 机制 + 留存 D1/D7/D30 + 转化 + 鲸鱼 + live ops 内容节奏 —— 并诚实处理掠夺式暗黑模式 / 强迫循环 / 剥削式商业化的伦理), (k) 设计师角色与工艺职业 (系统 / 关卡 / 叙事 / UX 设计师之分 + 通才 vs 专才 + 独立作者 vs 3A 团队 + 设计文档 + 传达设计意图 + GDC 工艺社区)。跨 3A / 独立 / 手游 F2P / 桌游。不含 游戏程序 / 引擎 (Unity/Unreal 编码 / 图形 / 网络同步) / 游戏美术 / 动画 / 音频 / 游戏制作 / 项目管理 / 排期 / QA / 游戏作为生意 / 发行 / 市场 / 电竞运营为终点 / 泛泛「我想做游戏」的 game-dev 教程 —— 本 skill 是「设计」学科: 规则 / 系统 / 机制 / 体验。 (Game Design — the cognitive operating system of practitioners who design the rules, systems, mechanics, and experiences of games (video games primarily, plus tabletop/board/card games): the discipline of deciding WHAT the player does, WHY it is meaningful, and HOW the moment-to-moment experience feels — distinct from game programming (builds the engine/code), game art (visuals/audio), and game production (schedule/budget/team). Covers (a) core design theory & frameworks (MDA Mechanics-Dynamics-Aesthetics Hunicke/LeBlanc/Zubek, Schell's Lenses, Koster's theory of fun = learning, Sid Meier 'a series of interesting decisions', Salen & Zimmerman 'meaningful play'/'second-order design'/'magic circle', Costikyan on uncertainty, Suits/Huizinga play philosophy), (b) systems & mechanics design (core loops, game economy sink/source/faucet-drain, feedback loops positive/negative, resource & progression systems, emergence vs scripting Will Wright 'possibility space', Machinations economy modeling Dormans, dominant/degenerate strategy, orthogonal design Garfield), (c) level & encounter design (blockout/greybox, pacing & tension, telegraphing, critical path vs exploration, environmental storytelling, gating & lock-and-key, difficulty curve), (d) game feel & juice (Steve Swink 'Game Feel', moment-to-moment responsiveness, screenshake/feedback/polish, input & camera, the 'feel' is designed not incidental), (e) player psychology & UX (Celia Hodent 'The Gamer's Brain', flow channel challenge-vs-skill Csikszentmihalyi/Jenova Chen, Bartle player types, motivation & reward schedules, onboarding/FTUE/tutorialization, cognitive load, accessibility), (f) balancing & tuning (Ian Schreiber 'Game Balance', symmetry/asymmetry, dynamic difficulty adjustment DDA, transitive/intransitive balance, nerf/buff, dominant strategy elimination, playtesting-driven tuning), (g) narrative & quest design (ludonarrative dissonance/harmony, environmental & systemic storytelling, branching vs linear, Amy Hennig character-driven, quest structure), (h) player-centric iterative process (Tracy Fullerton 'Game Design Workshop' playcentric design, paper prototyping, vertical slice, playtesting protocol 'watch don't talk / you are not your play

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。

谈判与议价 (谈判与议价 (Negotiation & Bargaining) — 面向要亲自坐上谈判桌的从业者（销售、采购、创业者、法务与商务、HR、投融资、以及为自己谈薪谈房谈合同的个人）的『把一次利益分歧，谈成一个双方都愿意签、签完还愿意执行的结果』的判断体系；不是某一个行业的成交话术合集，也不是博弈论课程，更不是把心理学包装成读心术的培训话术。覆盖：(a) 第一性张力 —— 这行最深的世界观分歧：**创造价值 ⇄ 攫取价值**（同一场谈判里，把饼做大和把饼切走用的是相反的动作：做大要交换信息、暴露优先级，切走要隐藏底线、制造稀缺；哈佛原则式谈判一派主张先做大再切，实战议价派认为在多数一次性交易里做大只是让步的遮羞布，这条张力叫谈判者困境，是整个学科的中心问题）；**原则式谈判 ⇄ 战术共情**（Getting to Yes 主张对事不对人、按客观标准而非意志力定输赢；Chris Voss 从人质谈判带出的路线针锋相对，书名 Never Split the Difference 直接反对折中，主张先用标签与校准问题把对方的情绪与安全感处理掉再谈条件，并公开批评双赢框架让谈判者被真正强硬的对手吃掉；两派对同一个动作——比如要不要说出你的底线——给出相反指令）；**关系先行 ⇄ 条款先行**（中文语境里做生意常常先建立关系、找中间人引荐、酒桌上定调、合同只是关系的书面确认，人情与面子既是润滑剂也是隐性负债；跨国与合规语境里条款先行、把一切写进合同，两种作业习惯在同一张桌上相遇时的误读，是中外商务谈判失败最常见的原因之一；学术上关系到底是效率替代品还是寻租温床，证据本身就是对立的，且反腐与合规收紧之后酒桌路径的风险显著上升）；**先出价 ⇄ 后出价**（实验研究普遍支持先出价能形成锚定优势，但在信息高度不对称的真实交易里，先出价可能暴露自己远低于对方预期，实务派与研究派对这条给出的条件不同）；**BATNA 是地基 ⇄ BATNA 被高估**（最佳替代方案是原则式谈判的支点，没有替代方案就没有说不的能力；反对者指出过度盯着替代方案会把谈判做成线性比价，且强替代方案在长期关系里会损害对方的信任）；**情绪是噪音 ⇄ 情绪是议题**（早期理性决策路线要求把人和问题分开，后来的研究把情绪重新请回桌上：愤怒有时确实能提取让步，代价是长期关系与对方的报复动机，实验证据两个方向都有）；**谈判是技能 ⇄ 谈判是性格**（培训产业的立身之本是可训练，而研究显示某些结果差异与性别、地位与社会代价强相关：女性主动发起薪酬谈判在部分情境会被惩罚，这不是话术能解决的结构问题，近年多地薪酬区间披露立法正在改变这条起点）；**诚实边界在哪**（虚构竞标者、夸大授权上限、拖延签约制造紧迫，这些在培训里被当技巧、在法律上可能构成欺诈性陈述，法域不同边界不同）。(b) 工具栈 —— 这一行最重要的工具是纸笔：议题清单与优先级打分表、替代方案与保留价的估算表、可交换筹码矩阵、同时抛出的多个等值报价、让步阶梯与理由库、授权与升级路径表、复盘表；软件侧则是合同全生命周期管理与条款库（Ironclad、DocuSign、Juro、LinkSquares，中国侧法大大、e签宝）、采购电子寻源与反向拍卖（SAP Ariba、Coupa、Keelvar，以及已在大企业跑通的自动化议价机器人 Pactum）、销售侧的折扣审批矩阵与 deal desk、薪酬与职级数据（Levels.fyi、Mercer、Radford 以及各地薪酬透明披露）、可比交易与市场价数据、调解与仲裁机构（CIETAC、SIAC、香港 HKIAC）、以及正在快速变化的大模型陪练与合同审查；选型的真正分岔从来不是功能表，而是『这场谈判赢在信息、赢在替代方案，还是赢在流程设计』。(c) 心智模型层 —— 结果在坐上桌之前就决定了大半；谈的是利益不是立场；议价区间是估计出来的不是给定的；让步是信息不是善意；说不出口的常常是面子与安全感而不是价格；代表别人谈判的人激励与授权跟本人不同；一次性交易与长期关系的最优打法不同而多数人搞错了自己在玩哪一种。(d) 工作流 —— 立项与利益相关方梳理、准备与对手画像、替代方案与保留价、议题打分与打包设计、开场与锚定、探询与试探性提议、让步管理、僵局与第三方介入、收口与防止反悔加码、合同化与争议解决条款、复盘与关系维护，以及薪资谈判、采购年度框架议价、并购价格与条款、多方与联盟、跨文化与远程邮件谈判这些特化路径。(e) 表达 DNA、质量基准（什么算一次好的谈判：不是拿到最低价，而是可执行、可复盘、不透支关系）、反模式（外行最容易犯的错：不准备就上桌、把立场当利益、单方面让步买好感、把折中当公平、拿假竞标者施压、口头承诺不落纸、赢了条款输了执行）、智识谱系（哈佛谈判项目与原则式谈判、行为决策与实验社会心理学派、危机谈判与战术共情派、谈判分析与博弈论派、销售采购的实战议价培训派、争议解决与调解派、跨文化谈判派、中文语境的关系与人情派）。) Master OS — automated mastery of 谈判与议价 (Negotiation & Bargaining) — 面向要亲自坐上谈判桌的从业者（销售、采购、创业者、法务与商务、HR、投融资、以及为自己谈薪谈房谈合同的个人）的『把一次利益分歧，谈成一个双方都愿意签、签完还愿意执行的结果』的判断体系；不是某一个行业的成交话术合集，也不是博弈论课程，更不是把心理学包装成读心术的培训话术。覆盖：(a) 第一性张力 —— 这行最深的世界观分歧：**创造价值 ⇄ 攫取价值**（同一场谈判里，把饼做大和把饼切走用的是相反的动作：做大要交换信息、暴露优先级，切走要隐藏底线、制造稀缺；哈佛原则式谈判一派主张先做大再切，实战议价派认为在多数一次性交易里做大只是让步的遮羞布，这条张力叫谈判者困境，是整个学科的中心问题）；**原则式谈判 ⇄ 战术共情**（Getting to Yes 主张对事不对人、按客观标准而非意志力定输赢；Chris Voss 从人质谈判带出的路线针锋相对，书名 Never Split the Difference 直接反对折中，主张先用标签与校准问题把对方的情绪与安全感处理掉再谈条件，并公开批评双赢框架让谈判者被真正强硬的对手吃掉；两派对同一个动作——比如要不要说出你的底线——给出相反指令）；**关系先行 ⇄ 条款先行**（中文语境里做生意常常先建立关系、找中间人引荐、酒桌上定调、合同只是关系的书面确认，人情与面子既是润滑剂也是隐性负债；跨国与合规语境里条款先行、把一切写进合同，两种作业习惯在同一张桌上相遇时的误读，是中外商务谈判失败最常见的原因之一；学术上关系到底是效率替代品还是寻租温床，证据本身就是对立的，且反腐与合规收紧之后酒桌路径的风险显著上升）；**先出价 ⇄ 后出价**（实验研究普遍支持先出价能形成锚定优势，但在信息高度不对称的真实交易里，先出价可能暴露自己远低于对方预期，实务派与研究派对这条给出的条件不同）；**BATNA 是地基 ⇄ BATNA 被高估**（最佳替代方案是原则式谈判的支点，没有替代方案就没有说不的能力；反对者指出过度盯着替代方案会把谈判做成线性比价，且强替代方案在长期关系里会损害对方的信任）；**情绪是噪音 ⇄ 情绪是议题**（早期理性决策路线要求把人和问题分开，后来的研究把情绪重新请回桌上：愤怒有时确实能提取让步，代价是长期关系与对方的报复动机，实验证据两个方向都有）；**谈判是技能 ⇄ 谈判是性格**（培训产业的立身之本是可训练，而研究显示某些结果差异与性别、地位与社会代价强相关：女性主动发起薪酬谈判在部分情境会被惩罚，这不是话术能解决的结构问题，近年多地薪酬区间披露立法正在改变这条起点）；**诚实边界在哪**（虚构竞标者、夸大授权上限、拖延签约制造紧迫，这些在培训里被当技巧、在法律上可能构成欺诈性陈述，法域不同边界不同）。(b) 工具栈 —— 这一行最重要的工具是纸笔：议题清单与优先级打分表、替代方案与保留价的估算表、可交换筹码矩阵、同时抛出的多个等值报价、让步阶梯与理由库、授权与升级路径表、复盘表；软件侧则是合同全生命周期管理与条款库（Ironclad、DocuSign、Juro、LinkSquares，中国侧法大大、e签宝）、采购电子寻源与反向拍卖（SAP Ariba、Coupa、Keelvar，以及已在大企业跑通的自动化议价机器人 Pactum）、销售侧的折扣审批矩阵与 deal desk、薪酬与职级数据（Levels.fyi、Mercer、Radford 以及各地薪酬透明披露）、可比交易与市场价数据、调解与仲裁机构（CIETAC、SIAC、香港 HKIAC）、以及正在快速变化的大模型陪练与合同审查；选型的真正分岔从来不是功能表，而是『这场谈判赢在信息、赢在替代方案，还是赢在流程设计』。(c) 心智模型层 —— 结果在坐上桌之前就决定了大半；谈的是利益不是立场；议价区间是估计出来的不是给定的；让步是信息不是善意；说不出口的常常是面子与安全感而不是价格；代表别人谈判的人激励与授权跟本人不同；一次性交易与长期关系的最优打法不同而多数人搞错了自己在玩哪一种。(d) 工作流 —— 立项与利益相关方梳理、准备与对手画像、替代方案与保留价、议题打分与打包设计、开场与锚定、探询与试探性提议、让步管理、僵局与第三方介入、收口与防止反悔加码、合同化与争议解决条款、复盘与关系维护，以及薪资谈判、采购年度框架议价、并购价格与条款、多方与联盟、跨文化与远程邮件谈判这些特化路径。(e) 表达 DNA、质量基准（什么算一次

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 diff with the reviewer fleet, funneled to one triaged verdict. Targets the current working diff, a path, or an inbound GitHub PR.

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。

Suede Labs cross-surface canon discipline: hold one canonical answer across every surface that states it (web, iOS, Android, docs, a second service) by generating a contract from the reference surface and making the others assert against it, so a divergence fails a test instead of reaching a user or an answer engine. Consistent canon is what makes a product citable: generative search quotes sources that do not contradict themselves, and a number that differs between your site and your app is a contradiction a model can see. Use when the same rule, threshold, ladder, or stated fact lives on two or more surfaces; when values are copied by hand out of a handoff; when two surfaces already disagree; or when auditing where they drifted. NOT FOR: deciding which surface is correct (a product call this skill records rather than makes); reviewing a diff (use suede-code-review); wiring merge gates (use suede-ci-gate); a generative-search audit of a page (use suede-seo-audit).

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。

Decide whether a preview the visual-diff bot flagged actually regressed or is simply nondeterministic, using a repeat-render oracle at a single commit. Use when a PR's preview diff reports a changed preview whose source the PR does not touch, or when a render, GIF or filmstrip is suspected of being unstable.

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。

Validate DESIGN.md files against the official Google specification using the `@google/design.md` CLI linter. Works with local files. Use when the user wants to lint a DESIGN.md, check spec compliance, find broken token references, verify WCAG contrast ratios, diff two versions, export tokens to Tailwind or DTCG format, or audit a design system file for structural correctness. Trigger on mentions of "validate DESIGN.md", "lint DESIGN.md", "check my design.md", "design.md spec compliance", "WCAG contrast check", "broken token references", "design token validation", "export design tokens", "diff design systems", "design.md audit", "@google/design.md", "npx design.md lint", "design system validation", "frontmatter tokens", or any request to verify a DESIGN.md file.

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。

Compare two images pixel-by-pixel and get a visual diff. Use when the user wants to compare their implementation against a design, spot differences between two screenshots, or verify visual regression.

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 a scaffolded sequence of practice problems with graduated difficulty and strategic variability. Use when creating worksheets, homework sets, or independent practice materials.

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。

Modify a classroom task with language scaffolds that preserve cognitive demand for EAL learners. Use when adapting existing tasks for students at different English proficiency levels.

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。

Redesign a direct instruction sequence to include productive struggle before the explanation phase. Use when teaching concepts that benefit from failure-first approaches.

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。

Independent review loop run before delivery in code work. An independent reviewer (Codex, or fresh Codex-style subagents) reads the whole PR against the approved outcome; the lead fixes in-scope functional findings and re-reviews until none remain. Its differentiator is independence and exhaustiveness — a reviewer that fails differently from the authors, run to clean — distinct from the recursive-refinement ladder. Invoked by the team lead from the unified pre-ship gate (code-mode and /swarm:refine) after the ship steps.

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。

Win #1 Product of the Day on Product Hunt. Completely reverse-engineered from 30x daily winner and 3x weekly winner campaigns — ranking algorithm decoded, launch timing optimized, hunter selection guide, community engagement approach, and post-launch momentum playbook. Use this if you're: (1) already read PH launch guides but still can't break into Top 5 and need algorithm-level deep optimization, (2) targeting Daily #1 and 5,000+ sign-ups with a proven 30+ case validated approach, or (3) an investor/accelerator coaching portfolio companies on PH launches. What's inside: PH ranking algorithm decoded: weighted factors for first 3 hours, 24 hours, and weekly ranking · Pre-launch preparation: gallery optimization, product URL selection, tagline refinement (≤60 chars) · Launch timing optimization: exact PST launch windows + scheduling guide · Community engagement KPIs: upvote targets, comment response time, maker comment strategy · Platform compliance guide: understanding PH's quality signals and organic growth · Post-launch 72-hour plan: maintaining momentum, conditions for Weekly #1 · Case studies: 3 different categories (AI Tool, App, SaaS) dissected Expected outcomes: Product Hunt Daily #1 ranking · strong community engagement on launch day · 3,000–10,000+ sign-ups (depending on product-market fit) 🇨🇳 Product Hunt 打榜完整攻略 | 🇯🇵 Product Hunt ローンチガイド | 🇰🇷 Product Hunt 런칭 가이드 Keywords: Product Hunt #1, Product Hunt launch strategy, PH ranking algorithm, PH #1 daily winner, Product Hunt tips, product launch, startup launch, ranking optimization, PH gallery optimization, Community engagement strategy, maker community engagement, product strategy, launch tactics, how to win Product Hunt, product hunt best practices