「what」の検索結果

Generate CHANGELOG.md entry from recent commits in conventional format. Also syncs the website changelog page. Use this skill whenever the user asks to: generate a changelog, document what changed between tags, or create a new CHANGELOG entry. If you see requests like "write the changelog for v0.17", "what changed since last release", this is the skill to use. Do NOT manually edit CHANGELOG.md without this skill — it ensures proper formatting, user-perspective writing, and website changelog sync. For full release workflows (Release PR review, tests, draft assets, publication, announcements), use /release instead.

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。

Restate in your own words what you think the user's goals are and what problem they're trying to solve. Use for /in-your-own-words.

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', reviewing a small diff you don't trust, or a brief that asserts something about existing code ('make X public', 'X already handles Y') before you design against that assertion.

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。

Doctrine for drafting and keeping working-group docs under `docs/wg/**` — RFC/RFD specs and findings/research/glossary. A WG doc is a language-agnostic, code-agnostic study of a domain: it argues *why* and defines *what*, never *how in our code*. Use when writing or editing anything under `docs/wg/`, an RFC/RFD, a spec, a design note, a glossary, or research findings — including "write up the design", "document the spec", or "capture what we learned". Not for plans/TODOs (untracked `*.plan.md`), user docs, or SDK API refs — use `docs` to route those.

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 10x product opportunities and high-leverage improvements. Use when user wants strategic product thinking, mentions '10x', wants to find high-impact features, or says 'what would make this 10x better', 'product strategy', or 'what should we build next'.

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 empowered product teams using discovery and delivery dual-track. Use when the user mentions "product discovery", "empowered teams", "feature factory", "opportunity assessment", "product vision", "product strategy", "what should we build", or "our roadmap is just a feature list". Also trigger when restructuring teams away from output-driven models, or deciding what to build next based on outcomes. Covers discovery techniques, team structure, opportunity assessment, vision/strategy, and continuous delivery. For customer interviews, see mom-test. For ongoing discovery systems, see continuous-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。

Define product positioning by mapping competitive alternatives, unique attributes, and best-fit customers to the right market category. Use when the user mentions "positioning", "competitive alternatives", "how to position", "market category", "positioning canvas", "repositioning", "category creation", "what category are we in", or "why prospects dont get what we do". Also trigger when launching a new product, entering a crowded market, or diagnosing why prospects dont grasp the product's value. Covers the positioning canvas and team workshops. For customer jobs analysis, see jobs-to-be-done. For go-to-market, see crossing-the-chasm.

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 what customers truly need by analyzing the "job" they hire your product to do. Use when the user mentions "customer discovery", "why customers churn", "what job does this solve", "competing against luck", "product-market fit", "switching behavior", "milkshake moment", or "functional vs emotional jobs". Also trigger when investigating why users choose competitors, designing features around real customer needs, or reframing a value proposition. Covers JTBD interviews, competition analysis, and jobs-oriented roadmaps. For product positioning, see obviously-awesome. For rapid validation, see design-sprint. For non-leading interview technique, see mom-test.

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。

Adversarial verification of finished work. Treats any "done" as a set of claims, then re-runs the claimed verifications, diffs what actually changed, detects weakened tests and false completion claims, and delivers an evidence-based verdict (VERIFIED / VERIFIED WITH CAVEATS / REFUTED). Use after any agent or model claims work is complete - "/fable-judge", "judge this work", "verify what it did", "did that actually work?". Also runs the fable-method trap suite against a skill or model via "/fable-judge suite TARGET".

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 the week on LinkedIn - what to post, when to post it, and who to engage with. Use when the user says "plan my week", "what should I post", "content calendar", "I have nothing to post about", or wants a posting schedule and an engagement list.

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 complete, beginner-friendly explanation of an entire code repository as a set of markdown files. Maps the repo structure with `treecap` (installing it if missing), studies the actual source, then writes a `CODE_EXPLANATION/` folder containing an `OVERVIEW.md` plus numbered deep-dive files (01_architecture.md, 02_models.md, ...) that explain how the code is built, what it does, and how the pieces fit together — illustrated with real code excerpts. Use this skill whenever the user wants to understand, document, onboard onto, or get a walkthrough of a codebase: phrases like "explain this repo", "explain the code", "code explanation", "walk me through this codebase", "help me understand how this is built", "document the architecture", or "what does this project do" — even if they don't say the word "skill". Prefer this over ad-hoc summaries whenever the goal is a durable, written explanation of a whole repo.

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 methodology for reproducing AND patching publicly disclosed, already-fixed vulnerabilities: sourcing the advisory and the fix commit, reading the patch diff, rebuilding a pinned offline lab, building a vulnerable-vs-patched contrast harness with proper controls, minimizing the trigger, designing and validating the fix, and writing it up as a blog post or whitepaper. Use this skill whenever the user wants to reproduce, demonstrate, understand, teach, or write about a known vulnerability or security incident: "reproduce this CVE", "build a repro for", "how did EchoLeak / Log4Shell / the postmark-mcp package actually work", "show me how this exploit worked", "write a blog post about this vulnerability", "set up a lab for CVE-XXXX", "pull the NVD/CVE/OSV details", or "make a PoC I can publish". Use it just as eagerly for the patching half: "how should this be fixed", "is this patch correct", "what would have caught this", "review this security fix", "write a regression test for this CVE", "how do I backport this", or "what's the right fix for this bug class" - even when the user never says the word "reproduce". Reach for it on vague asks like "help me understand this security advisory", "I want to write about this incident", or "can we test whether we were vulnerable" when a disclosed vulnerability is in play. This skill only handles ALREADY-PATCHED, publicly disclosed issues and refuses zero-day discovery, live targets, and weaponization.

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。

Standards and audits for writing academic papers, especially ML/NLP submissions to NeurIPS, ICML, ICLR, ACL, EMNLP, NAACL. Covers the author's house prose rules (zero em dashes, zero fluff, every sentence earns its place), verification of hallucinated claims and hallucinated or malformed bibliography entries, the ACL policy on AI writing assistance and what must be disclosed, and best practices for paper structure, experiments, reproducibility checklists, and rebuttals. Use this skill whenever the user is drafting, editing, polishing, restructuring, or reviewing a paper, abstract, intro, related work, rebuttal, or camera-ready; whenever they ask to "clean up" or "tighten" academic writing; whenever citations or a .bib file need checking; and whenever they ask what has to be disclosed about AI assistance. Reach for it even when the user only says "make this section better", "check my references", or "is this ready to submit".

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。

Add file-based observability, tracing, and run analysis to LLM/agent experiments — per-turn transcripts, tool calls and results, reasoning traces, token/cost accounting, per-episode artifacts, plus terminal viewers and a run-comparison report. Platform-agnostic: one small adapter covers OpenAI, Gemini/Vertex, Anthropic, LiteLLM, Tinker, vLLM, or any custom inference stack, and the same tooling then works unchanged. Use this skill whenever the user wants observability, tracing, logging, or run tracking for model experiments; asks why an agent failed a task or wants to replay/debug/diff an episode; wants to compare models, arms, or ablations; wants to instrument a new folder, repo, or platform ("add observability here", "do the same for Tinker/Gemini/OpenAI"); wants to import or tie in existing experiment results so old runs show up alongside new ones; or wants eval runner scripts where many models share one protocol. Reach for this even when they only say "log what the model is doing", "I can't tell what happened in this run", or "set up traces for this experiment".

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。

Answer questions about what the user recently did on their computer — who contacted them, what they were working on, where they left off — by reading the local Computer History summaries and raw event streams.

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。

Turns rough intent or a weak prompt into a reliable one — diagnosing why output is inconsistent, restructuring the instruction, and adapting it across models. Use this when a prompt is not producing what was wanted, when output varies run to run, when writing a prompt for a repeated task, when moving a prompt between models, or when someone describes what they want an AI to do and needs it written properly.

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。

Drives implementation by writing a failing test first, then the smallest code that passes it. Use this before writing implementation code for any feature or bugfix, when a bug needs a regression test, when existing code is hard to change safely, or when someone asks whether a change is covered. Also use to decide what is worth testing and what is not.

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。

Writes down what is being built so a team can build it and know when they are done — problem and success measure before solution, scope stated by exclusion, user-visible behavior including the states everyone forgets, acceptance criteria someone can test, and the open questions named rather than buried. Use this to write a specification, review one that is causing rework, or work out why a delivered feature technically matched the request and still was not what anyone wanted.

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。

Manages delivery risk and cross-team dependencies — identifying, sizing, mitigating and escalating what could stop the work. Use this to build a risk register that gets used, manage dependencies between teams, decide what to escalate and when, or work out why the same risks keep materializing unmanaged.

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。

Upgrades an existing interface to a higher standard without rebuilding it — auditing what is there, identifying what reads as generic or unfinished, and sequencing changes by impact. Use this when a product works but looks dated or default, when a redesign is being considered, when deciding whether to restyle or rebuild, or when a screen needs to look substantially better with limited effort.

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。

Administers the cloud the company runs on rather than the one it sells — tenant and subscription structure, the SaaS estate and who owns each app, identity as the real perimeter, cloud spend that arrives as a surprise, and what the provider does not do for you. Use this to structure subscriptions or tenants, get control of sprawling SaaS, cut a cloud bill, work out who owns an application nobody admits to buying, or decide what corporate workloads belong in cloud at all.

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 rhythm an organization runs on — which reviews happen weekly, monthly and quarterly, what each one decides, who owns the numbers presented, and how a signal at the front line reaches the people who can act on it. Use this to set up a management operating system, fix a meeting calendar that produces no decisions, work out where a recurring problem keeps failing to surface, or cut a review structure that has grown past what it informs.

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。

Covers what the organization owns and what it is only borrowing — trademarks and clearance, copyright and work-for-hire, patents and trade secrets, open-source license obligations and copyleft reach, and IP terms in customer, contractor and AI-tool agreements. Use this to check whether a name is usable, establish that you own work you paid for, decide how to handle a license obligation in a dependency, or respond to an infringement claim.

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。

Runs the hypervisor layer beneath the servers — host capacity and consolidation ratios, VM sprawl, snapshot discipline, resilience and live migration, and licensing that counts cores rather than instances. Use this to size or expand a cluster, work out why VMs are slow when the hosts look idle, clean up sprawl, set snapshot and template policy, or decide what stays virtualized and what moves to cloud.

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。