3,646 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Use when executing a written implementation plan across sessions or with review checkpoints. Small or single-slice plans stay inline. For same-session independent tasks, use subagent-driven-development 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。
Use when executing a written implementation plan with independent tasks in the current session where delegation beats inline coordination cost; otherwise inline. Ad-hoc 2+ tasks without a plan use dispatching-parallel-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。
Use when requesting independent code review, after implementation slices, before merging high-risk work, or when verification exposes evidence, baseline, architecture, compatibility, or retirement uncertainty.
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 commits as reviewable work units. Trigger: implementation, commit splitting, chained PRs, or keeping tests and docs with code.
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。
Write tests that pin real behavior instead of implementation details, config values, or lucky samples. Use when adding tests for new behavior, writing a regression test, fixing a brittle or flaky test, reviewing a test diff, or when a test breaks after a refactor or config change that didn't change behavior.
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。
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the codebase or domain is unfamiliar, the user will "know it when they see it", a reference implementation must be understood before porting, mid-build deviations from the plan need capturing, or a finished change needs buy-in or verified understanding before merge. Pairs with [write-spec](../write-spec/SKILL.md) — walk the quadrants to burn off fog before slicing, and feed the finished map into the spec.
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 [implement-spec](../implement-spec/SKILL.md) with Codex doing the implementation passes while you orchestrate, integrate, and review. Use when the user asks to implement a spec with Codex, or to run implement-spec with Codex as the implementer.
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。
Explore UI and visual design with image generation, then iterate the real implementation against the user-selected concept. Use when brainstorming visual directions, offering mockup variants, or implementing an approved generated design; do not stop at the mockups or the first code approximation.
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 the local Codex CLI as an independent second agent. Two branches — (1) proactively run `codex review` for a second opinion after completing a substantive change, before presenting it as done or committing; (2) delegate a well-defined implementation task via `codex exec`, ONLY when the user explicitly asks for Codex to do it. Also covers how to prompt Codex.
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 a spec under specs/<feature>/ is done shipping (a write-spec build, or any planned task that produced a spec), archive it to specs/done/ and rewrite it from a build-plan into a durable rationale — the why, the principles, the invariants — pointing back to the real code for the how. Use when implementation has landed and the plan no longer matches what shipped, or the user says a feature/spec is finished. Pairs with [write-spec](../write-spec/SKILL.md) (the plan this closes) and [review](../review/SKILL.md) (run before closing).
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。
Audit whether tests earn their maintenance cost and which suite owns each contract. Use when pruning redundant tests, investigating implementation coupling or test-only production hooks, reviewing the value of proposed coverage, or auditing an entire subsystem. Use write-tests to implement the resulting test 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。
Compare screenshots against the intended design, distinguishing approved references from historical baselines. Use for iterative implementation matching, before/after visual review, objective image telemetry, or checking a lone capture for flat, empty, or badly framed content.
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。
Hand a spec that is mid-implementation to another machine or another agent.
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。
Review changed code for naming, stale references, unnecessary complexity, and comment quality. Use after completing implementation work, before committing, or when the user asks to review or audit code.
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。
Design schemas and migrations, tune queries, or plan vector retrieval and database operations. Application API implementation uses oma-backend.
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。
Design-first ideation that explores user intent, constraints, and approaches before any planning or implementation. Use for brainstorming, ideation, exploring concepts, and evaluating approaches.
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 product requirements into scoped tasks with dependencies and acceptance criteria. Use for implementation planning and prioritization.
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。
Detect insecure JWT (JSON Web Token) implementations in a codebase using a two-phase approach: first map all JWT issuance and verification sites to understand the token lifecycle and signing configuration, then check each verification site for exploitable weaknesses such as algorithm confusion, missing signature verification, weak secrets, header injection, and missing claim validation. Requires sast/architecture.md (run sast-analysis first). Outputs findings to sast/jwt-results.md. If no JWT usage is found in Phase 1, Phase 2 is skipped. Use when asked to find JWT, token forgery, or authentication bypass 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。
Drive one accepted change through implementation and checks to done, with one fresh review only where a mistake is costly. Use when: selected by name.
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。
Engineering operating model for teams where AI agents generate a large share of implementation output.
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 only after explicit Codex `$superloopy:superloopy-research` or Claude Code `/superloopy:superloopy-research` invocation, a research task started with a leading `loopy` or `루피` (such as `loopy research`), or an active Superloopy loop explicitly routing a research deliverable here. Evidence-backed Superloopy research orchestration with automatic advisory usage targets, parallel read-only lanes, per-retrieval verdicts, graded and dated sources, empirical verification, a priced claim ledger, cited synthesis, and optional reports. Do not activate from research, investigate, look-up, summarize, deep-dive, report, or similar vocabulary alone, in any language; ordinary questions, debugging, and implementation context-gathering stay with their primary workflows.
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。
Strategic SEO planning for new or existing websites. Industry-specific templates, competitive analysis, content strategy, and implementation roadmap. Use when user says "SEO plan", "SEO strategy", "SEO planning", "content strategy", "keyword strategy", "content calendar", "site architecture", or "SEO roadmap".
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。
Hreflang and international SEO audit, validation, and generation. Detects common mistakes, validates language/region codes, and generates correct hreflang implementations. Use when user says "hreflang", "i18n SEO", "international SEO", "multi-language", "multi-region", or "language tags".
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。
Critical pre-implementation review. Find what AI breaks. Verdict: PROCEED, REVISE, or RETHINK. Triggers: review plan, tear apart, critique, analyze.
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。