「feature discovery」の検索結果

Provides guidance for training and analyzing Sparse Autoencoders (SAEs) using SAELens to decompose neural network activations into interpretable features. Use when discovering interpretable features, analyzing superposition, or studying monosemantic representations in language models.

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。

Compares two or more dotnet new templates side by side to help users choose between them based on parameters, feature support, frameworks, and classifications. USE FOR: deciding between similar templates (webapi vs webapp, blazor vs blazorwasm, console vs worker), producing a side-by-side comparison of parameters and feature support, understanding how templates differ before creating a project. DO NOT USE FOR: creating a project from a template (use template-instantiation), authoring or validating custom templates (use template-authoring and template-validation), general single-template discovery (use template-discovery).

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。

Provides guidance for training and analyzing Sparse Autoencoders (SAEs) using SAELens to decompose neural network activations into interpretable features. Use when discovering interpretable features, analyzing superposition, or studying monosemantic representations in language models.

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。

Discover related plans for the current task: same feature folder full depth, other features active-only, general-plans active. Like vc-context-discovery but for plan artifacts.

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 Jobs-to-be-Done framework as applied product methodology. Job statements, struggling moments, hire and fire criteria, the difference between feature-thinking and job-thinking. Honest about where JTBD adds clarity (discovery, prioritization, positioning) and where it becomes performative ritual (job-statement workshops that do not drive decisions, persona-theater disguised as JTBD). Triggers on jobs-to-be-done, JTBD, job statements, struggling moments, hire criteria, fire criteria, switch triggers, functional emotional social jobs, outcome-driven innovation. Also triggers when a team is over-relying on feature-request lists or persona archetypes that do not drive product decisions, when a positioning conversation needs the framing JTBD provides, or when discovery is producing outputs that do not connect to product 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。

Compares two or more dotnet new templates side by side to help users choose between them based on parameters, feature support, frameworks, and classifications. USE FOR: deciding between similar templates (webapi vs webapp, blazor vs blazorwasm, console vs worker), producing a side-by-side comparison of parameters and feature support, understanding how templates differ before creating a project. DO NOT USE FOR: creating a project from a template (use template-instantiation), authoring or validating custom templates (use template-authoring and template-validation), general single-template discovery (use template-discovery).

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。

Act as a product-manager copilot that turns evidence into product decisions and artifacts: backlogs and prioritization, PRDs and user stories, metrics and OKRs, experiments, launch plans, feedback triage, and pricing/packaging, kept in a per-product workspace. Use whenever the user wants to decide what to build, spec it, or ship it: "write a PRD for…", "prioritize our backlog", "what should we build next", "plan OKRs", "define our north star metric", "design an A/B test", "plan the launch", "triage this customer feedback", "platform or feature?", in any language ("viết PRD", "ưu tiên tính năng nào", "quản lý sản phẩm", "プロダクト管理", "产品经理"), even when they never say "product manager". Also use when the user returns to a product workspace this skill created (a directory holding `product.md`, `state.md`, and `decisions.md`). Not for deep user discovery (design-thinking), desk market facts (market-researcher), or company-level bets (strategy-board).

Architect a feature with the Carmack Council before writing code. Use when explicitly asked to plan a feature, do a "council plan", "carmack plan", or invoke /council-plan. Carmack's philosophy chairs a council of domain experts — Troy Hunt (security), Martin Fowler (refactoring), Kent C. Dodds (frontend), Matteo Collina (Node.js), Brandur Leach (Postgres), Vercel Performance, Simon Willison (LLM pipeline), Karri Saarinen (UI quality), Vitaly Friedman (UX quality). Interactive feature discovery followed by parallel subagent dispatch. Produces a sequenced, attributed implementation plan with no code. Stack: Next.js App Router / React / TypeScript / tRPC / Prisma / Neon / Clerk.

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。

Consolidate the five tdmcp surveyor reports into one prioritized FEATURE_BACKLOG.md — dedupe cross-surface overlaps, reconcile every candidate against the roadmap (NEW vs planned vs extension), rank by a selectable impact×effort weighting profile into P0/P1/P2 (high-confidence first), and emit per-surface tables + a recommended-next shortlist that hands straight to the build pipeline. Use when a td-synthesizer agent is consolidating surveys during the feature-discovery harness.

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。

Sales enablement, technical presales and deal acceleration for B2B SaaS revenue teams. Use this skill when planning outbound campaigns, running discovery calls, building deal strategy, creating battle cards, writing proposals, responding to RFPs, preparing a product demo, scoping a proof of concept or pilot, answering a security questionnaire or the AI annex buyers now attach to it, executing sales sequences, coaching qualification, or deciding what the website's AI chat agent is allowed to say. Also triggers on: outbound, cold outreach, reply handling, reply classification, out-of-office replies, auto-replies counted as replies, our reply rate is inflated, prospect replied remove me, opt-out by reply, is this list ready to send, launch readiness, CRM segment outbound, we emailed a current customer, outbound hit an open opportunity, ownerless leads, deal strategy, pipeline, battle card, proposal, RFP, discovery call, MEDDPICC, sales sequence, qualification, sales engineer, solutions engineer, presales, demo plan, demo script, POC, proof of concept, pilot success criteria, technical evaluation, technical win, security questionnaire, vendor security review, SOC 2 questionnaire, AI security questionnaire, AI annex, AI vendor due diligence, the buyer is asking if we train on their data, do you train on customer data, which model do you use, model provider sub-processor, AI subprocessor disclosure, where does inference run, can the customer turn the AI feature off, AI-CAIQ, CSA AI Controls Matrix, ISO 42001, ISO/IEC 42001, NIST AI RMF, EU AI Act Article 50, are we a provider or a deployer, AI feature disclosure, our model vendor changed and nobody told the buyer, technical objection, mutual action plan, MAP, close plan, mutual close plan, buyer enablement, the deal is stalled, deal stalled after the demo, how do I get this deal to close, close date keeps slipping, JOLT, buyer indecision, no-decision loss, website chatbot, chat widget, AI chat agent, AI SDR, inbound AI SDR, conversational marketing, live chat, what should our chatbot be allowed to say, our chatbot quoted the wrong price, the bot promised a discount, do we have to disclose it is AI, EU AI Act chatbot disclosure, chatbot handoff to sales, chat transcript review, prompt injection on our chatbot, Drift, Qualified, Intercom.

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。

Fornece orientação para treinar e analisar Autoencodificadores Esparsos (SAEs) usando SAELens para decompor ativações de redes neurais em features interpretáveis. Use ao descobrir features interpretáveis, analisar superposição ou estudar representações monossemânticas em modelos de linguagem.

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。

[Investigation] Use when about to author a new Feature Spec from an idea — investigate all existing Feature Specs AND related code logic first to surface related/overlapping/affected specs, missing features, missing test cases/user stories, system unknowns, and the invariant landscape, before any spec is drafted.

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。

Conduct a Marty-Cagan-style opportunity assessment interview and produce a ~2-page Opportunity Brief in Confluence. Covers business objective, customer, problem, success metric, current alternatives, assumptions/risks, and what we don't know yet. Triggers on "opportunity brief", "opportunity assessment", "discovery brief", "who is this for", "why are we building this", "validate this idea", "product discovery", or any request to frame a feature before implementation. One question at a time. Records accepted research gaps as structured Confluence Decision pages with bidirectional links.

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。

Consolidate the five tdmcp surveyor reports into one prioritized FEATURE_BACKLOG.md — dedupe cross-surface overlaps, reconcile every candidate against the roadmap (NEW vs planned vs extension), rank by a selectable impact×effort weighting profile into P0/P1/P2 (high-confidence first), and emit per-surface tables + a recommended-next shortlist that hands straight to the build pipeline. Use when a td-synthesizer agent is consolidating surveys during the feature-discovery harness.

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。

Provides guidance for training and analyzing Sparse Autoencoders (SAEs) using SAELens to decompose neural network activations into interpretable features. Use when discovering interpretable features, analyzing superposition, or studying monosemantic representations in language models.

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。

Provides guidance for training and analyzing Sparse Autoencoders (SAEs) using SAELens to decompose neural network activations into interpretable features. Use when discovering interpretable features, analyzing superposition, or studying monosemantic representations in language models.

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。

Owns the Ideal State Artifact — the primitive holding a project or task's articulated ideal state; scaffolds, interviews, grills a half-formed idea into shape via checkpointed discovery, scores completeness, reconciles feature excerpts to master, seeds from a repo, and appends decisions/changelog/verification across a locked seventeen-section order. USE WHEN ISA, ISC, ideal state, ideal state criteria, project specification, hill-climb, articulating done, fog, not yet specified, grill me, discovery interview. NOT FOR creating new skills (use CreateSkill).

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。

JTBD discovery techniques adapted for AI product owner context. Four Forces extraction, job dimension probing, question banks, and anti-patterns for interactive feature discovery conversations.

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 onboarding and help systems including product tours, interactive tutorials, tooltips, checklists, help panels, and progressive disclosure patterns. Use when building first-time experiences, feature discovery, guided walkthroughs, contextual help, setup flows, or user activation features. Provides timing strategies, accessibility patterns (keyboard, screen readers, reduced motion), and metrics for measuring onboarding success.

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。

Creates and maintains project documentation for features, systems, and components. Use when documenting how a feature, system, or component works — including writing, updating, or organizing docs. Does not scan or detect the project's technology stack — use project-discovery for repository analysis and config detection. Does not create architectural decision records — use architectural-decision-record for ADRs. Does not create or update coding standards — use coding-standard instead. Does not generate PR descriptions — use update-pr-description for that. Does not produce runbooks for operational scenarios — use runbook for that. Does not rewrite existing prose for readability — use edit-for-readability for that. Does not produce an ephemeral, understand-now overview of code or a PR — use code-overview for that.

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。

Designs the contract for an API change inside one codebase — a component's props, a function surface, URL or query parameters, an event payload, or a module boundary — through a discovery pass, an options document with one recommendation, a question round, and an adversarial validation round, with every element of the contract justified from one stated goal. Use when you want to design, shape, decide, or nail down an interface, contract, signature, or API change for a capability you can already describe, sized for roughly one pull request. Produces a design document and changes no code. Does not specify what a feature should do — use plan-a-feature. Does not plan delivery or sequencing — use plan-implementation. Does not assess the architecture of existing code — use architectural-analysis. Does not write the code — use tdd. Does not restructure existing code — use refactor. Runs its rounds without pausing for review; to review each round as it lands, use pairing.

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。

Analyzes an existing codebase using strategic Domain-Driven Design to discover bounded contexts, surface ubiquitous language and semantic collisions, find places where code boundaries diverge from domain boundaries, and produce an evidence-backed domain and context map. Use when the goal is DDD-specific: bounded context discovery, ubiquitous language analysis, domain model discovery, or mapping contested ownership and responsibility. The entire repository is a valid scope; no module or directory must be named first. Does not assess architectural coupling, cohesion, or technical debt — use architectural-analysis. Does not design service communication, integration patterns, or deployment topology — use architectural-analysis or plan-a-feature. Does not refactor code, diagnose bugs, or review code quality — use refactor, investigate, or code-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。

Selects informative features for biomarker discovery using Boruta all-relevant selection, mRMR minimum redundancy, and LASSO regularization. Use when identifying biomarkers from high-dimensional omics data.

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。