「how to」の検索結果

Analyze a codebase and recommend Claude Code automations (hooks, subagents, skills, plugins, MCP servers). Use when user asks for automation recommendations, wants to optimize their Claude Code setup, mentions improving Claude Code workflows, asks how to first set up Claude Code for a project, or wants to know what Claude Code features they should use.

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。

Tools are how AI agents interact with the world. A well-designed tool is the difference between an agent that works and one that hallucinates, fails silently, or costs 10x more tokens than necessary. This skill covers tool design from schema to error 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。

Save, load, update, delete, merge, and navigate entity objects using TMS Aurelius ORM (TObjectManager). Use when the user asks how to persist or retrieve data with Aurelius, manage object lifetime, work with associations or collections at runtime, handle transactions, use cached updates, or control concurrency. Does NOT cover query DSL or criteria/projections (those are in a separate skill). Triggers on requests like "save an entity with Aurelius", "load a customer from the database", "add items to a collection", "how do I update an object", "flush changes", "delete a record with Aurelius", "merge a transient object", "how do transactions work in Aurelius", "batch updates Aurelius".

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 two separate areas of the codebase simultaneously and combine findings into a comparison report. Use when you need research on two independent topics at once, want to compare two subsystems, or need to understand how two components relate to each other.

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。

Before improving anything, show the spread of what can concretely be done on this specific input — a short menu of 3-5 interventions from lightest to heaviest touch, then wait for the user to pick. Domain-agnostic; works on any material the user hands over. Trigger when the user says "spread", "show me my options", "what can you do with this", or asks to improve or fix something without specifying how. Do NOT trigger when the user has already named a specific fix — then just do the 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。

At the close of an epic (or a difficult issue), post a postmortem roundup comment — what went well, what was hard (backed by evidence), and 1–3 concrete proposals to improve the skills/flows — then offer to turn accepted proposals into their own `workflow`-labeled tasks, and end with a `🔭 Next` handoff (a paste-ready next-session prompt + the next epic to start). Use at epic close, after the "verify the whole thing" rollup, or when asked to "do a retro", "postmortem this epic", "what did we learn", "how do we improve the workflow".

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。

How to actually run every kind of test in nuxt-crouton (unit/e2e/typecheck/lint, verified commands) plus the HONEST coverage picture — which packages have real tests vs zero, the dormant skipped/todo cases behind three mocking walls, and what CI truly gates vs what CLAUDE.md claims. Use when asked "how do I run the tests", "is X covered by tests", "what does CI actually check", "why is this suite skipped", "where do I add a test", or before trusting a green build as evidence that something works.

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。

Which docs in nuxt-crouton to trust and how to resolve contradictions between them. Use when two docs disagree, when a doc's claim doesn't match the code ("the README says packages/nuxt-crouton but that dir doesn't exist"), when deciding whether a guide/writeup is authoritative before following it, or when asked "is this doc current", "which doc wins", "why does CLAUDE.md say X but the code says Y". Also the reference for the supersession-banner practice.

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。

Strategy map analysis using the Eterdis two-directional causal chain. Use this skill to diagnose whether strategy is coherent by building two chains — bottom-up from resources to results, top-down from expectations to requirements — and finding where they don't connect. Runs in three modes — full diagnostic for deep sessions, review mode for quick re-assessment, and alert triggers for early-warning signals. Updates company-context.md after every run. Triggers on questions about strategic alignment, why the strategy isn't working, what to invest in, how the business creates value, whether the plan is realistic, or where the biggest gap is. Based on practice by Eterdis (eterdis.com).

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。

Competitive positioning diagnostic — figures out where you actually stand relative to competitors and whether that position is defensible. Use this skill when someone needs to understand their real competitive position (not the one on the slide deck), when a new competitor has entered the market, when customers are switching and nobody can explain why, when pricing power is eroding, when a strategic investment depends on knowing whether the moat is real, or when leadership says "we're differentiated" but can't explain how. Draws on Playing to Win, Porter's generic strategies, and Blue Ocean thinking — applied as diagnosis, not planning. Based on practice by Eterdis (eterdis.com).

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。

Bootstrap a new or existing project with a small, file-based documentation system so Claude Code keeps context, lessons, and decisions across session restarts instead of starting cold every time. Sets up a handful of markdown files under .claude/ (standing rules, a free-form note to your next session, a phased roadmap, a prioritized backlog, and searchable history/changelog archives) sized and split so the files read every session stay small while the archives grow without ever costing context. Use this whenever someone is starting a new project and asks how to structure it for long-running AI-assisted work, wants Claude to "remember" things between sessions without relying on chat history, asks for a CLAUDE.md + backlog + changelog setup, mentions "session continuity", "persistent context", "project memory system", or is retrofitting an existing codebase that has no such system yet. Also use to explain or extend an already-bootstrapped bottle system (add a rule, start the archival script, add a new backlog section).

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。

Knowledge base from NIST SP 800-37 Revision 2, the Risk Management Framework (RMF) for information systems and organizations. Use for the seven RMF steps (Prepare, Categorize, Select, Implement, Assess, Authorize, Monitor) and their tasks; the three-tier organization-wide risk model; authorization boundaries; the requirements-to-controls relationship; security categorization (FIPS 199/200 high-water mark) and control selection/tailoring (SP 800-53/53B baselines); assessment, the authorization decision and risk acceptance, continuous monitoring and ongoing authorization; the security/privacy distinction; and supply chain risk management. This is the security-and-privacy-risk-governance edge of systems engineering — it governs how much protection and whether to accept residual risk, complementing the disciplines that decide how protection is built. Does NOT reproduce the SP 800-53 control catalog or its baselines, the FIPS impact tables, or the ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288 process text; it names and routes to them rather than restating them.

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 a schedule extract (milestone list or planning tool export) and the period's status notes into a DRAFT plain-language slip explanation: which milestones and activities slipped and by how many working days, arithmetic shown, why per the notes as verbatim fragments with source and date, what each slip pushes next per the extract, and the decision each slip needs framed as a question with the options the notes propose and the owner the governance documents name, every missing fact marked UNKNOWN. Use when the user asks to "explain the schedule slip", "what slipped this month and why", "write the schedule commentary for the steering pack", "put the delay in plain language for the sponsor" or "what decisions do these slips need". Do not use for the weekly status report, use project-status-tracker instead; for cost variances, use budget-variance-explainer; for one sprint's carry-over, use sprint-review-summary. 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。

Drafts the instructions field of a declarative agent that orchestrates a set of custom skills, under a character cap (default 8,000), from the skills' names and descriptions: role and scope, one routing rule per skill, workflow order, gates written as workflow holds, global rules, output format and what the agent never does. Returns the text in a fenced block with its character count labelled counted or estimated, plus a skill inventory, routing table, gate table, rules trace and open questions for the owner. Use when the user asks to "write the instructions for my agent", "draft a system prompt that ties these skills together", "tighten these agent instructions to fit the cap", "how should the agent route between these skills" or "revise my agent's orchestration text". Do not use to review a single SKILL.md, use skill-file-reviewer 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。

Drafts one knowledge article or known-error article from a resolved incident or ticket thread: symptoms as reported, environment, cause exactly as the resolver stated it, resolution steps as performed, workaround with its limits, verification, things tried without effect, related records, keywords and proposed metadata, every statement traced to a ticket note or marked UNKNOWN, with a redaction log and a question list for the knowledge owner. Never decides a root cause, adds a step or publishes. Use when the user asks to "write a KB article from this ticket", "turn this resolved incident into a knowledge article", "draft a known error record for this", "document the fix we just did" or "make this thread into a how-to for the service desk". Do not use for a procedure the team will execute (runbook, operating procedure, playbook), use runbook-drafter instead; for a post-incident review, use incident-postmortem-drafter. 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。

Pre-tests one message (email, announcement, intranet post, town hall script, customer notice or slide) against two to six role personas the user supplies and returns a DRAFT panel report: each persona's likely first reaction, objections, unanswered questions, misreadings and what they would do next, every point tied to the passage that triggers it, plus suggested edits that add no fact the message does not already hold. Use when the user asks to "pre-test this message", "how will the team read this", "run this past the personas", "what objections will this raise", "find the holes before I send" or "check this lands with managers and field staff". Do not use for an in-character review of a proposal or business case by one executive archetype, use the executive-review family (cfo-reviewer, frontline-skeptic-reviewer and siblings) instead; to write the message in the first place, use announcement-drafter. 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。

Work with SuperCollider projects as files - the shape of a .scd piece, how to read and write one with sc_project, how to send the file that is on disk into the live session with sc_load, what state belongs in the session and what belongs in the file, and how to package a piece the SuperCollider way (a folder with its .scd, its SynthDefs, and a Quark-style layout) instead of inventing a format.

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。

Measure a target repository's queue and find a live open issue the contribution would close, before opening a pull request there. Reports how many PRs are open, how many of the last N closed ones were actually merged, and which issue to attach to, because a cold PR into a dead queue is a wasted artifact. Triggers: "/issue-match", "is this repo worth a PR", "measure the queue".

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。

How to read submitted JetFormBuilder form data from a custom action, transform it (including %macro% replacement of admin-typed templates), call an external HTTP API, write the response back into the form context for downstream actions to use, and dispatch JFB events based on the API outcome. Use when building a custom action that integrates with a third-party service (LLM call, webhook, CRM, payment processor, geolocation lookup) and needs the action to behave as a node in a data-flow graph rather than a one-shot leaf. Triggers on mentions of "jet_fb_context", "update_request", "has_field", "get_value", "wp_remote_post" with form data, "macro replacement", or "API call from action".

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。

Register a custom Dynamic Visibility condition for JetEngine — extend \Jet_Engine\Modules\Dynamic_Visibility\Conditions\ Base, hook jet-engine/modules/dynamic-visibility/conditions/register, call $manager->register_condition( new MyCondition() ). The 3 abstract methods are get_id() / get_name() / check( $args = [] ); override get_group() to assign a UI group, is_for_fields() / need_value_detect() / need_type_detect() to control where the condition appears, get_custom_controls() to add per-condition UI controls. The check() $args includes type ('show' or 'hide'), field / field_raw, value, data_type ('chars' / 'numeric' / 'datetime' / 'date' / 'list'), and context ('default' or 'current_listing'). Important — $args['type'] is the user's show/hide intent; condition must invert its boolean accordingly. Use get_current_value() helper for context-aware meta resolution (handles WP_Post, WP_User, WP_Term, WP_Comment, listing macros). Use when scaffolding a JetEngine companion plugin's visib...

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。

When the user wants to create, optimize, or analyze a referral program, affiliate program, or word-of-mouth strategy. Also use when the user mentions 'referral,' 'affiliate,' 'ambassador,' 'word of mouth,' 'viral loop,' 'refer a friend,' 'partner program,' 'referral incentive,' 'how to get referrals,' 'customers referring customers,' or 'affiliate payout.' Use this whenever someone wants existing users or partners to bring in new customers. For launch-specific virality, see launch.

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 to "plan how our narrative lands on every surface", "write per-surface message-match specs", or "brief each creative builder from the canon"; maps the narrative-registry canon onto every flagship surface (homepage, pricing, store listing, sales deck, social bio, docs, email) as a per-surface message-match spec — what claim, pillar, proof, and objection reframe each surface must carry — and cuts a handoff brief to each discipline's creative builder (content-writer, ad-creative-builder, email-creative-builder, social-creative-builder, message-house-builder), so the same story lands consistently everywhere. Not for writing the finished surface copy — use each discipline creative builder; not for the tier-scoped launch asset manifest — use launch-asset-packager; not for scoring cross-surface consistency — use narrative-quality-auditor; not for claim adjudication — use offer-claims-registry. 叙事落地/逐面消息一致/创意交接简报/画布传导

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 to "map the category narrative", "tear down how competitors tell their story", or "find the language conventions in our market"; produces a category narrative map — the dominant stories and points of view in the category, its language conventions and framing clichés, and a per-competitor narrative teardown (arc, claimed onlyness, proof pattern) plus how each rival's messaging has shifted over time (scraped copy vs archived copy). Not for the positioning canvas itself — use positioning-mapper; not for the beachhead's beliefs and objections — use audience-belief-mapper; not for SERP keyword targeting — use keyword-research; not for claim adjudication — use offer-claims-registry. 品类叙事/竞争叙事拆解/语言惯例/叙事演变

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。

How to author one new tdmcp MCP tool the house way — the file shape (XImpl + registerX), the Python-bridge pattern (buildPayloadScript/parsePythonReport over executePythonScript), the result helpers (errorResult/guardTd/jsonResult/structuredResult), fail-forward error handling, ESM/.js + Biome style, and the offline msw unit test that proves it. Load this whenever building, extending, reviewing, or testing a tdmcp tool file under src/tools/** (and its test under tests/unit/**). Use it for every Phase-13 / v0.5.0 feature-build tool and any re-run after a gate failure.

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。