「decisions」の検索結果

Guides Stripe integration decisions across development and test environment planning (separate sandboxes vs the shared test mode sandbox), API selection (Checkout Sessions vs PaymentIntents), Connect platform setup (Accounts v2, controller properties), billing/subscriptions, tax and registrations (Stripe Tax, automatic_tax, product tax codes), Treasury financial accounts, integration options (Checkout, Payment Element), migrating from deprecated Stripe APIs, and security best practices (API key management, API key permissions, webhooks, OAuth). Use when planning, building, modifying, testing, or reviewing any Stripe integration, including choosing a development environment, accepting payments, building marketplaces, integrating Stripe, processing payments, setting up subscriptions, collecting sales tax, VAT, or GST, creating connected accounts, or implementing secure key handling.

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。

Guides Metronome usage-based billing integration decisions — event ingestion (single and batch, idempotency, billable metrics), contract design (rate cards, overrides, dimensional pricing, products), invoicing lifecycle (grace periods, finalization, Stripe sync), credit and commit management (prepaid, postpaid, thresholds, auto-recharge), and Stripe integration (arrears invoicing, tax providers, line item limits). Use when building, modifying, or reviewing any Metronome integration — including ingesting usage events, creating customers, contracts, or rate cards, designing billable metric group keys, managing credits and commits, configuring invoicing, syncing invoices with Stripe Billing, billing AI applications for token usage, setting up self-serve (PLG) pricing, reviewing customer health, commit burn, portfolios, or renewals, or migrating from Stripe Billing Meters to Metronome.

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 ctx as working memory for prior agent work. Before starting or continuing work in an unfamiliar area, resuming earlier work, or revisiting an investigation, search prior sessions to ground yourself in earlier context. Use ctx blame to trace a line, file, commit, or PR to the agent session that produced it. Use when prior decisions, constraints, attempts, tool calls, transcript evidence, or code provenance may matter. Use ctx graph queries on indexed projects to follow calls and dependencies and understand what a change might affect.

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。

Optional design-improvement pass for when you have spare usage to drain. Finds the shallowest modules in the code the spec touches, researches a deeper design, and proposes refactors that shrink interfaces and hide decisions — behavior held constant, tests green before and after. Proposes §I/§V/§T edits, never silent rewrites. Triggers when the user says "deepen this", "improve the design", "this module feels shallow", "pull complexity down", "use spare budget on the codebase", or invokes /ck:deepen. Leans on the codebase-design skill's deep-module vocabulary when present.

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 users need visual direction, interface hierarchy, layout decisions, design specifications, or prototypes before implementing a Web or mini program UI.

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, repair, and close MCP attribution issues from the local report API with evidence-driven decisions and isolated Worktrunk worktrees. Use this skill when Codex needs to process `tool` attribution issues and skills-related attribution issues, inspect related runs, decide whether the issue is actionable in `mcp/src` or `config/source/skills`, update attribution fields as `owner=codex`, and then complete the fix loop through GitHub issue tracking, worktree-based code changes, PR submission, and follow-up iteration when the problem is repairable.

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。

API design patterns and conventions for this project. Covers RESTful URL naming, response format standards, error handling, and authentication requirements. Use when writing or reviewing API endpoints, designing new APIs, or making decisions about request/response formats.

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。

Run all four review skills (investor, customer, operator, skeptic) on a business plan in sequence, then auto-decide where verdicts agree and surface only disagreements + taste decisions to the user. One command = full review gauntlet, intelligently filtered. Use when a plan is ready to be stress-tested before commit. Triggered by: 'panel review', 'review panel', 'run all reviews', 'review gauntlet', '审议会', '四方评审'.

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。

Orchestrate App Store releases with asc, including staging a version, uploading or building an artifact, publishing, and submitting for review. Use when the user wants to prepare or execute a release. Keep Game Center item preparation in this skill; route other readiness failures, stuck submissions, cancellation, and retry decisions to asc-submission-health.

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。

Diagnose App Store submission blockers and operate review health with asc, including readiness validation, repair routing, status monitoring, cancellation, and retry decisions. Use when validation fails, a version is not in a valid state, review status is unclear or stuck, or a failed submission must be repaired and retried. For staging, upload, publication, and submission execution, use asc-release-flow.

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 the decisions in a pipeline that do not need the expensive model and propose the gate for each: a rule, a classic classifier, or a small model, with fail-closed routing. Use when the user asks to cut model costs or latency, says the big model handles everything, or wants a triage / routing / filter layer in front of an agent. Analysis plus an optional baseline scaffold. Do NOT use for auditing context layout (context-audit) or for building eval suites (evals-bootstrap).

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。

Run scoped or final cross-media consistency checks for mathematical-modeling artifacts, comparing canonical numbers, symbols, parameters, decisions, files, and paper claims without performing full-workspace audits for low-risk changes.

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 the smallest set of diagnostic, comparison, paper, and appendix figures or tables needed to support verified mathematical-modeling decisions and claims.

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。

Translate, transcreate, review, or maintain multilingual product and marketing content, including source locking, glossary decisions, language style, machine-assisted workflows, legal-content safeguards, QA, and source-change synchronization. Use localization-strategy for market scope, locale architecture, rollout, and production release planning.

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 or review source-backed descriptive, diagnostic, predictive, and prescriptive analysis for consequential decisions. Use when an agent must profile and safely prepare uploaded data, turn a real dataset or research question into a reproducible study, investigate drivers without overstating causality, validate a model, compare feasible actions under dependent uncertainty and tail risk, trace every parameter to evidence and approval, or produce an answer-first analytical report across health, business, finance, policy, engineering, operations, behavioral science, AI, or planning.

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 building or debugging Unity gameplay systems: enemy AI that patrols, chases and attacks, NavMesh baking and agents (AI Navigation 2), feet sliding on agents, state machines or behavior trees, physics projectiles that tunnel, the physics spiral, layers and the collision matrix, CharacterController vs Rigidbody characters, object pooling, 'hundreds of enemies', DOTS, Burst or Jobs decisions, Netcode for GameObjects multiplayer, audio mixers, snapshots, volume sliders and 3D combat sounds.

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。

Draft a board or executive summary of an engagement using outcomes, risks and investment decisions. Use when the sponsor needs to brief senior leadership.

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 meeting notes or a transcript into sourced decisions, changes and next actions. Use after a customer conversation; review consequential record updates before saving.

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。

OKR design as actually shipped, not as conference-talk theory. Outcome statements that drive decisions, key results that measure the right thing, scoring discipline, mid-quarter recalibration, and the difference between sandbagged OKRs (always 100%) and aspirational OKRs (always 30%) and stretch OKRs (genuine ambition with quarterly accountability). Triggers on OKR design, OKR setting, key result design, OKR scoring, mid-quarter recalibration, OKR cascading, outcomes vs outputs, quarterly planning, goal setting. Also triggers when a team's OKRs are always hit and producing no learning, when OKRs are demoralizing because they were set as fantasy, or when the team uses OKR vocabulary but the practice has decayed.

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。

Communicate effectively with stakeholders across functions and seniority levels. Use this skill when writing status updates, preparing executive reviews, sharing technical decisions with non-technical audiences, managing up, communicating bad news, or designing the communication cadence for a project. Triggers on stakeholder update, status report, executive summary, exec review, manage up, communicate bad news, project comms, status meeting, weekly update. Also triggers when a project is going off track and the team needs to communicate it.

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 discipline for designing experiments (A/B tests, multivariate, holdouts) so the results actually answer the question you asked. Hypothesis writing, sample size, duration, segment analysis, running discipline, matching a result to a pre-committed decision rule, and the common failure modes that produce confidently wrong shipping decisions. Use this skill whenever the user is planning a test that has not run yet: framing a hypothesis, sizing the sample, setting duration, choosing guardrails, or deciding whether something is worth testing at all. Triggers on design an experiment, experiment plan, A/B test, split test, multivariate test, holdout, experiment hypothesis, sample size, minimum detectable effect, MDE, test duration, guardrail metric, no peeking, pre-committed decision rule, is this worth testing. Use `experimentation-analytics` instead when the test has already run and the question is how to read the result panel.

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。

Walk the user through four directional axes (tone register, aesthetic philosophy, audience relationship, sensory ambition) and produce a structured aesthetic brief that downstream content, copy, design, and art-direction skills consume as required input. The aesthetic depth layer, distinct from `creative-brief` (operational kickoff: scope, audience, deliverables, constraints). Use when a project needs aesthetic coherence across many small decisions and the user has only a vague feeling, or when multiple downstream aesthetic-producing skills need a shared brief. Triggers on creative direction, aesthetic direction, set the aesthetic, define the visual direction, what's the vibe, what's the tone, the four axes. Does NOT fire for a general kickoff brief (use `creative-brief`), tactical single-piece work, already-documented direction, purely functional output, or locked production-stage work.

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。

Run conversion rate optimization through hypothesis-driven testing including audit, hypothesis generation, test design, statistical analysis, and rollout decisions. Use this skill whenever the user wants to optimize conversion, run A/B tests, audit a funnel, generate test hypotheses, design experiments, or analyze test results. Triggers on conversion optimization, CRO, A/B test, split test, multivariate test, hypothesis, conversion funnel, funnel audit, experiment design, statistical significance, lift, optimization. Also triggers when the user has a conversion problem and isn't sure where to start, or when test results are ambiguous and need interpretation.

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。

Systematic content refresh discipline. Quarterly audits, refresh prioritization (which pieces, when, how deep), refresh-vs-merge-vs-delete decisions, the lifecycle that distinguishes intentional refresh from set-and-forget decay. Builds on the refresh sections of pillar-content-architecture and editorial-qa with a program-level discipline. Triggers on content refresh, content decay, content audit, refresh prioritization, content lifecycle, refresh strategy, traffic decay, ranking drop, content freshness, evergreen content, content maintenance. Also triggers when traffic is eroding silently across an aging content library, when teams cannot decide which pieces to refresh, or when refresh work is happening but the impact is unclear.

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。