「improve」の検索結果

Claude adapter for reviewing PlainTab architecture, coupling, testability, and refactoring opportunities.

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。

Reinforces an AI agent by turning Monte Carlo's reinforcement loop diagnosis into code fixes. Reads the daily reinforcement loop report for an agent's workflows, ranks the diagnosed issues, proposes what to fix, and — with the user's approval at each step — opens a pull request. Activates on "fix my agent", "improve my agent's health", "reinforce my agent", "what should I fix in my agent". Not for investigating a specific agent alert or trace (monte-carlo-troubleshoot-agent-traces), creating agent monitors (monte-carlo-monitoring-advisor), or instrumenting a new agent (monte-carlo-instrument-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。

Guide users from coverage analysis to monitor creation. USE WHEN user asks what should I monitor, where are my gaps, improve coverage, or wants a systematic approach to monitoring across their data estate.

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。

Improve existing code without changing behavior: scan smells, simplify, dedupe, reuse utilities, and verify after edits. Use for refactor, cleanup, simplify, reduce duplication, extract method, dead code, or code smells. No PR.

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。

Close the learning loop — record reward signal for an action AgentDB suggested. Use after using anything from agentdb_pattern_search / reflexion_recall / skill_search / learning_route. The bandit needs the signal to improve.

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 adaptive learning with ReasoningBank for pattern recognition, strategy optimization, and continuous improvement. Use when building self-learning agents, optimizing workflows, or implementing meta-cognitive systems.

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。

Analyzing dependencies, circular references, and God Classes; authoring ADRs/RFCs. Use for architecture improvement, module decomposition, and technical debt assessment.

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。

Analyse existing written feedback for quality, specificity, actionability, and impact on student learning. Use when reviewing teacher or peer feedback to improve feedback practices.

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。

Redesign a learning space using biophilic design principles to improve focus, calm, and wellbeing. Use when classroom environment contributes to restlessness, poor attention, or stress.

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。

Analyse a learning task for cognitive load problems and recommend specific design improvements. Use when tasks overwhelm students, instructions feel complex, or materials need simplifying.

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 and evaluate grounded ideas. Use when the user asks for ideas, improvements, surprising options, or AI-generated directions before choosing one to develop; use ce-brainstorm to refine the user's own idea.

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 requirements, plans, or specs with role-specific lenses. Use when the user wants to improve an existing planning document.

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。

Optimizes application performance across frontend, backend, queries, and databases. Use when performance requirements exist, when you suspect performance regressions, when Core Web Vitals or load times need improvement, when N+1 query patterns need fixing, or when profiling reveals bottlenecks.

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 conduct, analyze, or synthesize customer research. Use when the user mentions "customer research," "ICP research," "talk to customers," "analyze transcripts," "customer interviews," "survey analysis," "support ticket analysis," "voice of customer," "VOC," "build personas," "customer personas," "jobs to be done," "JTBD," "what do customers say," "what are customers struggling with," "Reddit mining," "G2 reviews," "review mining," "digital watering holes," "community research," "forum research," "competitor reviews," "customer sentiment," or "find out why customers churn/convert/buy." Use for both analyzing existing research assets AND gathering new research from online sources. For writing copy informed by research, see copywriting. For acting on research to improve pages, see cro.

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 set up, improve, or audit analytics tracking and measurement. Also use when the user mentions "set up tracking," "GA4," "Google Analytics," "conversion tracking," "event tracking," "UTM parameters," "tag manager," "GTM," "analytics implementation," "tracking plan," "how do I measure this," "track conversions," "attribution," "Mixpanel," "Segment," "are my events firing," or "analytics isn't working." Use this whenever someone asks how to know if something is working or wants to measure marketing results. For A/B test measurement, see ab-testing.

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。

Push the LLM to reconsider, refine, and improve its recent output. Use when user asks for deeper critique or mentions a known deeper critique method, e.g. socratic, first principles, pre-mortem, red team

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。

Brownfield improvements — the full WDS pipeline in miniature for existing products

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。

Clinical copy-editor that reviews text for communication issues. Use when user says review for prose or improve the prose

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。

Push the LLM to reconsider, refine, and improve its recent output. Use when user asks for deeper critique or mentions a known deeper critique method, e.g. socratic, first principles, pre-mortem, red team.

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。

Clone, port, or convert features from any GitHub repo into your project. Use when stealing patterns from external repos or porting proven code. Understand before copy, challenge before implement. 4 modes: port (rewrite), compare (analysis), copy (transplant), improve (copy + optimize).

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 retrospective. Analyzes commit history, work patterns, and code quality metrics with trend tracking. Per-person breakdowns, shipping streaks, and actionable improvements. Use when asked for "retro", "weekly review", "what did we ship", or "engineering retrospective".

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。

Code quality review — patterns, security, performance, correctness. Finds bugs, suggests improvements, triggers fix for issues found. Escalates to opus for security-critical 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。

Build, critique, and refine academic posters from a paper, LaTeX project, reference draft image, HTML/CSS source, PPT/PDF outputs, or local figure assets. Use when Codex is asked to create or improve a research poster, convert a poster design to HTML/PDF/PPTX, fix poster layout/typography/overflow/blank-space issues, or preserve paper figures and result semantics in a poster.

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 auditing an agent codebase against the 12-Factor Agents methodology, reviewing LLM-powered system architecture, or assessing agentic app compliance. Triggers on "analyze agent architecture", "12-factor audit", "how compliant is this agent", or "evaluate this LLM app". Also applies when comparing frameworks or planning agent improvements. Not for quick checklists — this performs deep per-factor codebase analysis with file-level evidence.

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。