「root cause」の検索結果

Use after an incident or outage is resolved — blame-free facilitation, root cause, corrective actions, memory write-back — even for a near-miss. Consumes the incident-commander skeleton.

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 shares a Sentry error, Jira bug ticket, or error description and wants root cause analysis. Also for proactive bug hunting and code audits for hidden bugs.

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。

[Workflow] Use when activating the Bug Fix workflow for systematic debugging with root cause investigation, fix, and verification.

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。

[Fix & Debug] Use when investigating a bug's root cause — reproduce the symptom, trace it end-to-start through the code, form and test hypotheses, and pinpoint the defect before any 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。

GStack investigation method for bugs, incidents, failing tests, regressions, and unclear behavior where evidence and root cause should precede 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。

The case-law chronicle of this repo's major failures — symptom, root cause, evidence, status, and the rule each battle minted — so nobody re-fights a settled battle or re-proposes a rejected fix. Use when a bug/incident looks familiar ("didn't this happen before?"), when you're about to propose an approach that may have been tried and rejected (e.g. shipping a migration from a package), when someone asks "why does rule X exist" / "why is done-by-lgtm a thing" / "what was incident 988", or when a bug-archaeology run hits the shallow-clone wall and needs the pre-June-2026 history. Trigger phrases: "has this broken before", "why can't packages ship migrations", "why did graduation fail", "why is the green-build lesson a rule", "what did we learn from incident NN". (For a live "build is green but the app is broken" symptom, start at crouton-diagnostics-index. NB keep this description free of any space-then-hash sequence — an unquoted YAML scalar treats space-hash as a comment start and silently truncates.)

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。

Pre-PRD Research methodology combining Business Analysis, Creative Problem-Solving, Brainstorming, and Innovation Strategy. Use before writing any PRD for problem validation, market research, competitive analysis, stakeholder interviews, ideation, 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。

Use when the user reports a hard bug, unexpected failure, or performance regression that needs 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。

Use when the user asks for QA analysis, test planning, test cases, or root-cause analysis of a defect. Also use for post-merge PR review analysis: auditing recent closed PRs for Devin/GitHub/security bot comments, verifying whether requested corrections were applied, and turning pending fixes into SPECs.

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 for bugs, test failures, broken behavior, or unexpected results; enforces 4-phase root-cause debugging before 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。

Production error → triaged, root-caused, repaired, and certified (tsc + rehearsal + reproduce-then-gone) fix PR for a human to merge — then confirm the error stops recurring. Never auto-merges.

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。

Reflection-first problem solving methodology for Convex development. Use before implementing any solution to ensure proper root cause analysis, 98% code confidence, and minimal change scope.

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。

Read the Convex deployment's 72h insights (read limits, OCC contention), root-cause each event in code, report evidence-backed perf/cost findings with 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。

Reflection-first problem solving methodology for Convex development. Use before implementing any solution to ensure proper root cause analysis, 98% code confidence, and minimal change scope.

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。

Read the Convex deployment's 72h insights (read limits, OCC contention), root-cause each event in code, report evidence-backed perf/cost findings with 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。

Production error → triaged, root-caused, repaired, and certified (tsc + rehearsal + reproduce-then-gone) fix PR for a human to merge — then confirm the error stops recurring. Never auto-merges.

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 one GitHub issue for root cause, complexity, and risk into .idd/analysis-N.json. Use when you need to analyze or scope issue #N. Don't use for creating issues (/issue-creator), triaging (/issue-triage), or resolving (/issue-resolver).

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。

Facilitate structured post-incident reviews to identify root causes, document what worked and failed, and produce actionable recommendations to improve future incident response.

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 network device logs to identify connectivity issues, latency problems, and outages. Correlate timestamps across timezones, detect anomaly patterns, and generate incident reports with root cause hypotheses. Use when troubleshooting network incidents from log 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。

Comprehensive Lean Six Sigma consulting skill supporting all belt levels (White Belt to Master Black Belt). Use this skill for DMAIC/DMADV project execution, Lean waste elimination (VSM, 8 Wastes/DOWNTIME, 5S), statistical analysis (process capability Cp/Cpk, control charts, hypothesis testing), and Six Sigma training/education. Triggers include "improve process", "reduce defects", "sigma level", "DMAIC project", "value stream mapping", "Kaizen", "process capability", "control chart", "root cause analysis", "5 Whys", "Fishbone diagram", "FMEA", "DOE", or requests involving process improvement methodologies.

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 coaching hypothesis-driven debugging that requires the learner to gather evidence and reason about root causes before applying 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。

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。

Load when asked to record/log a durable finding, or after discovering a non-obvious reusable root cause or repository behavior that should be appended to `dev/_journal/journal.md`; not for routine progress notes or facts already documented.

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。

Prepares a DRAFT data incident impact brief from the incident notes and data inventory the user provides: the timeline as stated, systems involved matched to the inventory, data categories held and evidenced as involved, people and record counts potentially affected with the source and method behind every figure, third parties, notification questions for legal and the data protection officer, and every UNKNOWN with the evidence that would settle it. No legal determination: it never states whether the incident is a reportable breach, whether notice is due, to whom or by when. Use when the user asks to "prepare the impact brief for this incident", "what data was involved", "how many people are affected", "map the incident to our data inventory" or "pull together what legal needs on the incident". Do not use for the blameless postmortem or root-cause timeline, use incident-postmortem-drafter 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。