「cause」の検索結果

Investigate unexpected behavior and mysterious bugs. Use when the cause of a problem is unknown and the user needs to understand WHY something is happening — symptoms like: sudden unexplained changes in metrics or behavior, works locally but not in staging/production, inconsistent or intermittent failures, correct code producing wrong results, operations succeeding but having no effect, environment-specific failures, duplicate executions, stale data, or any "why did this change?" or "why is this happening?" situation. Covers infrastructure anomalies (cache hit rates dropping, latency spikes, queue behavior shifts) as well as code bugs. The key signal is confusion about root cause, not a request to implement a known fix. Do NOT use for feature requests, known fixes, planning, or documentation tasks.

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。

Root-cause debugging discipline. Use when a test, build or pipeline fails, behaviour does not match expectations, a bug task arrives, or a task comes back in need_revision — before proposing 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。

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。

Tests whether changes caused a metric move without a clean A/B test: DiD, synthetic control, IV, RDD. Use when asking did a launch cause lift.

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。

Record a causal relationship between two memories in AgentDB — "X caused Y", "A supersedes B", "patch-foo depends-on patch-bar". Use when the user is documenting cause/effect, dependencies, supersessions, or after-action 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。

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。

Diagnose and fix mini-program failures through reproducible, evidence-driven root-cause analysis across source, state, asynchronous timing, caches, mock data, build versions, platform behavior, devices, cloud calls, and external services. Use when users report white screens, crashes, stale or jumping values, missing data, intermittent behavior, permission failures, performance stalls, device-only defects, API or cloud-function errors, source-versus-build mismatches, or regressions whose cause is not yet established. Freezes the observation environment, ranks competing hypotheses, runs discriminating checks, creates a failing regression test before repair, covers analogous states, and never hides a known failure with longer waits, swallowed errors, forced success, or cosmetic patches.

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。

Causal reasoning in historical analysis. Covers distinguishing immediate from underlying causes, tracing chains of causation across time scales, identifying unintended consequences, and applying counterfactual reasoning to assess causal significance. Use when analyzing why historical events occurred, evaluating the relative weight of causes, or assessing whether outcomes were inevitable or contingent.

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 why something happens — confirm the question and success criteria with you, then trace the root cause with an evidence chain.

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。

Shapes for running many sub-agents at once — fan-out with a barrier, maker/checker, generate-and-filter, tournaments for ranking, hypothesis fan-out for root cause, and loops that stop on a condition with a cap. Use when a phase has several independent targets, when a task is too large or too repetitive for one window, when the same edit applies across many files, when ranking or judging a large set, when several hypotheses compete, or when work must repeat until a signal says stop. Does not apply when units depend on each other's results or the cause is still unknown — investigate first, then parallelize.

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。

Codified expertise for quality control, non-conformance investigation, root cause analysis, corrective action, and supplier quality management in regulated manufacturing. Informed by quality engineers with 15+ years experience across FDA, IATF 16949, and AS9100 environments. Includes NCR lifecycle management, CAPA systems, SPC interpretation, and audit methodology. Use when investigating non-conformances, performing root cause analysis, managing CAPAs, interpreting SPC data, or handling supplier quality issues.

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 root-cause isolation and minimal fix proposal for software 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。

AI-assisted debugging specialist with deep knowledge of modern debugging tools, observability platforms, and automated root cause analysis. Implements Cursor Debug Mode methodology — structured hypothesis ranking, targeted code instrumentation, human-in-the-loop reproduction gate, log-confirmed root cause, and mandatory cleanup.

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。

Separate expensive observation from cheap decision-making in autonomous agent loops using a two-clock architecture. A fast clock accumulates data into a digest file; a slow clock reads the digest and acts only when something is pending. Idle cycles cost nothing because the action clock returns immediately after reading an empty digest. Use when building autonomous agents that must observe continuously but can only afford to act occasionally, when API or LLM costs dominate and most cycles have nothing to do, when designing cron-based agent architectures with observation and action phases, or when an existing heartbeat loop is too expensive because it calls the LLM on every tick.

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。

Coordinate safely with a peer interactive session sharing the same git worktree — check first whether a separate worktree removes the problem, then declare path and branch scope before the first edit, survive a contended index lock, and review the whole branch before opening a PR. Activate when starting work in a repository that may already be occupied, when a git command fails with `index.lock: File exists`, when `guard:snapshot` refuses because a snapshot already exists, or when a commit turns out to contain a file this session never edited. When one session leads and the other supports, divide the labour by shape and re-derive every reported number against a named revision before citing it. Distinct from subagent concurrency: a peer session cannot be bracketed, because no baseline exists from before its edits.

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 docker exec hanging when starting background processes (servers, daemons) inside containers. Use when: (1) docker exec never returns despite using & or nohup, (2) background server started in container causes docker exec to hang indefinitely, (3) env_startup_command in SWE-bench or similar frameworks times out, (4) setsid/disown needed for proper process detachment in Docker. Root cause: docker exec tracks ALL processes in the exec session, not just the top-level PID.

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 with root cause investigation. Four phases: investigate, analyze, hypothesize, implement. Iron Law: no fixes without root cause.

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。

分布式训练梯度尖刺 (Gradient Spike) 根因定位。基于梯度监控数据 (trend.db/CSV)、 msprobe dump 统计数据，三阶段渐进式从异常坐标定位逐层深入到算子级根因。 当用户明确指明分析梯度尖刺问题时使用此 skill。 即便用户提供以上数据，但未指明分析梯度尖刺问题时，不可使用此skill。

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 Bhaskar's critical realism to analyze phenomena through three ontological domains (real, actual, empirical), identify generative causal mechanisms via retroduction, and examine structure-agency interplay. Use this skill when the user needs to go beyond surface correlations to underlying causes, design research that distinguishes mechanisms from events from experiences, or when they ask 'what causes this beyond the observed pattern', 'what structures enable or constrain this behavior', or 'how do I move from correlation to causal explanation'.".

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。

"Implement Statistical Process Control charts to monitor production process stability. Use this skill when the user needs to detect process shifts, set control limits, or distinguish common cause from special cause variation — even if they say 'process monitoring', 'control chart', or 'is our process in control'.".

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 bugs with unknown root cause. Spawns fresh-context investigation subagent + parallel /review solve companion, persists hypotheses across iterations, hands off to /fix when root cause found.

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。

Conduct structured root cause analysis using Ishikawa (Fishbone), 5 Whys, and Pareto methods. Suitable for production incidents, quality defects, customer complaints, and recurring operational problems. Use when problems recur or when initial fixes do not resolve the issue. Do not use for one-time, obvious fixes or strategic decision-making.

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。