「root-cause」の検索結果

Produces a human-readable, progressive-disclosure overview of unfamiliar code or a pull request's changes — why it exists (the real problem it solves or goal it serves for the business or a user), and from there what it does, how it flows, and where to start — so you can get up to speed before working on or reviewing it. Use when you want to understand, get oriented in, make sense of, explain, or get up to speed on a chunk of code, a file, a directory, a symbol, or a PR's changes. Writes the overview to a scratch file and changes no code. Does not review code quality or raise findings — use code-review for auditing changes or post-code-review-to-pr for posting them. Does not produce durable feature or system documentation — use project-documentation. Does not assess architecture or structural risk — use architectural-analysis. Does not diagnose bugs or root-cause failures — use investigate. Does not pace a person through the code one step at a time in conversation — use code-walkthrough.

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。

Produces a progressive-disclosure overview of unfamiliar code or a pull request's changes with code-overview and publishes the resulting overview to a user-specified Confluence location. Use when the user wants code or a PR explained, oriented, or made sense of AND the overview posted to a Confluence space or page. Requires a configured Atlassian MCP server. Does not produce the overview to a local file only — use code-overview. Does not publish an arbitrary existing markdown file — use markdown-to-confluence. Does not document an already-understood feature to Confluence — use project-documentation-to-confluence. Does not root-cause a bug to Confluence — use investigate-to-confluence. Does not plan or specify a new feature to Confluence — use plan-a-feature-to-confluence. Does not publish to Jira — use work-items-to-jira.

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。

Create Chinese monospaced compass-style PDCA or CAPD problem-solving cards using East-West-South-North-Center layout, full-width and half-width spaces, diagonal Unicode arrows, and strict Chinese character limits. Use when Codex needs to turn a problem, incident, decision tradeoff, root-cause analysis, improvement cycle, or CAPD/PDCA workflow into a square text diagram, Hermes/Discord-ready card, or Chinese 方位九宮圖 with center ◎, north Plan, east Do, south Check, west Action, and four diagonal transition arrows.

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 vulnerable code to identify underlying root causes such as violated assumptions, incorrect invariants, missing validation checks, or unsafe component interactions. Use when investigating security vulnerabilities, CVEs, exploit code, or security audit findings. Infers why the vulnerability exists beyond surface symptoms, identifies systemic issues, and explains the chain of failures that enable exploitation.

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。

Locate root causes of failing regression tests by analyzing code changes, error messages, and test dependencies. Use when regression tests start failing after code changes, investigating test failures in CI/CD, debugging flaky tests, or understanding why previously passing tests now fail. Analyzes git diffs, stack traces, test output, and dependency changes to produce structured markdown reports ranking likely causes. Triggers when users ask to find why tests are failing, debug regression failures, investigate test breakage, or analyze failing test suites.

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。

Systematically trace bugs backward through call stack to find original trigger. Use when errors occur deep in execution and you need to trace back to find the original trigger.

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。

Apply when debugging. Trace each symptom to its root cause and fix it there; reproduce first, ask why until you reach it, resist nil-check guards that silence crashes.

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 debugging methodology - scientific method, hypothesis testing, and root cause analysis that works across all technologiesUse when "bug, debugging, not working, broken, investigate, root cause, why is this happening, figure out, troubleshoot, doesn't work, unexpected behavior, debugging, root-cause, hypothesis, scientific-method, troubleshooting, bug-hunting, investigation, problem-solving" 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。

Finds the cause of a hard bug by running several read-only subagents in parallel, each attacking it from a different angle (change history, code path, data and state, environment, reproduction), then checking their evidence, ranking the hypotheses and naming the one experiment that would confirm the leader. It diagnoses and does not fix. Use when someone says "hunt this bug with multiple agents", "swarm on this regression", "investigate in parallel", "find the root cause", or when a failure is intermittent, crosses components, or has resisted a first look.

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。

Refuses "flaky" as a diagnosis. Turns an intermittent failure into a reproduction by isolating it from the environment, naming the variable that controls it, forcing that variable, and measuring before and after with enough runs to count. Separates real defects from environment contention with evidence, and never retries to green or widens a threshold. Use when a test, performance check, or deploy step fails intermittently or passes on rerun.

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 strict code reviewer, pair programmer, debugger, and mentor for Python, Bash, Google Apps Script, JavaScript, and Swift/Apple platforms. Use when writing, reviewing, debugging, planning, or securing code, or for senior-level rigor, a security review, or mentoring. Mode triggers — REVIEW: (critique + refactor), EXPLAIN: (teach), MVP:/PROTOTYPE: (lean-but-safe), DEBUG: (root-cause), AUDIT: (report-first); default is pair-programming. Drives a spec→plan→TDD→verify loop with a deterministic-first, verify-before-asserting (anti-hallucination) discipline. Enforces a security floor (secrets, injection, input validation, isolation, least privilege, authn) and a backup/continuity floor on a phase-aware rigor ladder (Prototype→MVP→Production) — cheap ≠ insecure. Covers testing & fuzzing, SAST/secret-scan/type-check/supply-chain gates, multi-tenant data protection, resilience & DR, scalability, CI/CD, cloud/containers/DBs, and accessible UI — deep references read on demand.

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。

Investigate an unexplained defect or unexpected behavior without changing application code. Use for root-cause diagnosis and an evidence-backed handoff, including a bounded unresolved result. Not for implementing a known fix, new features, or explanation-only questions.

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。

Investigate an unexplained defect or unexpected behavior without changing application code. Use for root-cause diagnosis and an evidence-backed handoff, including a bounded unresolved result. Not for implementing a known fix, new features, or explanation-only questions.

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。

Uncover root causes through recursive Why questioning and consequence exploration. Use before acting on problems.

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 a task in code_review was sent back before (an earlier need_revision comment exists) - verify every prior point was fixed at its root

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。

Executes an approved implementation plan through fresh implementer and reviewer agents for each task, with explicit handoffs, focused tests, and task-by-task integration. Use for multi-task work where independent agent context improves implementation and review quality. Not for a single small edit, an unresolved design, or a failure that still 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。

Validates a running application, CLI, API, service, or generated artifact as a user or operator against a prewritten observable behavior contract while remaining source-blind. Use for acceptance checks, runtime proof, anti-fake probes, release smoke tests, or an independent companion to code review. Not for source-quality findings, root-cause diagnosis, or visual design judgment outside the contract.

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。

Investigates a bug, failing test, build error, regression, flaky behavior, performance symptom, or unexpected result by reproducing it, minimizing the case, testing ranked hypotheses, tracing the first incorrect state, and locking the root cause with a regression check. Use before proposing a fix. Not for planning a new feature or reviewing a healthy 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。

Designs or reviews HTTP, REST, GraphQL, RPC, CLI, webhook, event, and service interfaces with explicit inputs, outputs, errors, compatibility, idempotency, pagination, authentication, versioning, and observability. Use when introducing or changing an API or cross-component contract. Not for internal implementation details with no boundary or for debugging one API failure; use root-cause-debugging there.

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。

Troubleshoots Monte Carlo AI agent alerts and traces — eval score drops, latency/token spikes, trajectory and validation breaches. Not for data incidents (monte-carlo-analyze-root-cause) or monitor creation (monte-carlo-monitoring-advisor).

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。

Investigate data incidents and find root causes using Monte Carlo's observability data. Guides the agent through systematic investigation: alert lookup, lineage tracing, ETL checks, query analysis, and data profiling. Activates when a user asks about data issues, incidents, alerts, or why data looks wrong.

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 this skill whenever you learn something important during a conversation: a key architectural decision, a project-specific convention, a bug root-cause, a 3rd-party API quirk, or any fact that would help a future agent avoid re-doing the same research. Writes structured entries to the project's knowledge base so that context persists across conversations and agents.

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 harness that makes Opus (or any Claude model) behave like Fable — it enforces seeing a task through to the end, with evidence and verification, as procedure. Use when starting a multi-step task (2+ sequential stories), long autonomous work, debugging or root-cause investigation, building render/executable artifacts (HTML, SVG, games, charts), or when the user says "fablize", "see it through", "verify as you go", "split into goals".

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 systematic root-cause debugging. Use when tests fail, builds break, something that worked yesterday broke, behavior doesn't match expectations, or you encounter any unexpected error. Use when you need to figure out what broke and why — a systematic approach to finding and fixing the root cause rather than guessing.

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。