3,579 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Help users build a professional eye for quality, articulate the reasoning behind successful product paradigms, and develop the conviction to make high-stakes decisions before data is available.
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。
Help users navigate complex product decisions by weighing competing priorities and calculating long-term value. This skill covers build-vs-buy logic, technical debt evaluation, and communicating tradeoffs to senior leadership.
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。
Help users master the high-stakes communication required to navigate executive reviews, board meetings, and strategic decision-making with clarity and confidence.
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。
Help users convert massive volumes of qualitative and quantitative feedback into high-confidence product decisions through rigorous synthesis and internal immersion.
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。
Standard collaboration patterns for all squad agents — worktree awareness, decisions, cross-agent communication
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。
ALWAYS invoke this skill before anything hard to undo gets agreed to - a contract, a purchase, a migration, a launch, a price change, a reorganisation - and whenever the user asks "what could go wrong", "what are we missing", "poke holes in this", or for a premortem or a red team, in any language. Assumes the decision already failed and works backwards to find out why, in a fresh agent that had no hand in making it. Sweeps nine areas and shows what each produced, including the empty ones. Ends on one verdict: go ahead, go but fix these first, try it small first, think again, do not do this.
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。
Gates whether a new test should exist and forces it to be efficient, protecting CI from low-value test bloat. Use before any change to what a pytest, Jest, or Playwright test asserts or sets up, down to one fixture or one assertion added to an existing block. Front-loads the value bar (every test must catch a realistic regression no existing test already catches; extend the nearest existing test before writing a new standalone one; test behavior through the public interface, not implementation details; collapse near-duplicates into parameterized cases) and the efficiency bar (deterministic, isolated, fast; pick the cheapest test level; Django TestCase over TransactionTestCase; no sleeps, no real network; no time bombs from absolute dates left to age against the real clock; no database a test never uses). Includes a "don't write it" decision tree. For fixing an existing flaky test use `/fixing-flaky-tests`; after this gate says a Playwright test is warranted, use `/playwright-test` for mechanics.
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 explicitly requests strict or test-first TDD, or when the current conversation already contains an explicit `TDD Route: strict` decision from another Aegis 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。
Use when asked for first-principles or Occam's-razor review, or when high-risk decisions involve competing constraints, fallback growth, duplicate owners, or architecture direction risk. Ordinary bug fixes stay on the fast path.
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。
Define or review a visual system, DESIGN.md, or redesign direction. Use for typography, layout, color, motion, and interaction design decisions.
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。
Architecture specialist for software/system design, module and service boundaries, tradeoff analysis, and stakeholder synthesis. Uses context-aware methods such as diagnostic routing, design-twice comparison, ATAM-style risk analysis, CBAM-style prioritization, and ADR-style decision records.
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。
Evaluate system boundaries and architectural tradeoffs. Use for architecture decisions, design reviews, and ADRs.
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。
Shape a request into one end-to-end slice with observable behavior; review write scope and reversible decisions. Use when: planning, breaking down or scoping a change.
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 a feature or initiative through a computed route: the conductor derives the canon delta and assembles the document package — from a zero-document null route for small fixes to an umbrella PRD with one spec per capability for large initiatives. Modes, named as the first word: sdd (full package), sources (MRD → BRD → URD) for market research, customer discovery, and business or user requirements, iso (BRS → StRS → SyRS → SRS) for ISO 29148 and regulated work, research for a technical investigation — never market research — that the research instrument closes either by scope coverage (a research document) or by a recommendation (an rnd). Explicit form: plan research <topic>. Use for 'plan the X redesign', 'create a roadmap', 'plan a new feature', 'I need market research before we plan', 'we're regulated — start the ISO requirements cascade', 'investigate X before we plan', 'compare the alternatives for Y' — a new investigation, not a finished report already in hand. Not for recording a decision or documenting existing code — use /archcore:document. Not for checking docs against code — use /archcore:review.
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 provenance, decisions, phases, context policy, and next steps as kernel.handoff/v1. Triggers: handoff, save, pause, context, continue later.
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。
The pre-merge review of a branch in a project that records its specs, decisions, and rules in .archcore/. Run this first for 'review my branch', 'review the changes before merge', or 'review before merge': it checks the changed code against the project's recorded canon and the changed documents against the code, and reports which side is wrong — spec-wrong or code-wrong; with no diff, it reports project health. A bug-hunting code review complements this review and does not replace it. Also use for 'show status', 'documentation gaps', 'check if docs match code', 'close out the feature', 'ship the feature and close it out', or after a staleness warning. Modes, named as the first word: drift for staleness detection, deep for a full documentation audit, closeout to close a finished feature, experience to capture a repeated pattern. Not for creating docs — use /archcore:document; not for planning — use /archcore:plan; not for a single-file edit with no branch review.
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。
Recall project-scoped Waggle history about a topic, component, decision, bug, experiment, or implementation attempt.
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 Waggle automatically as portable, local project memory during meaningful coding work; retrieve prior decisions and constraints, then store only durable outcomes.
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。
Checkpoint durable decisions, fixes, constraints, results, and open next steps from the current Codex task into scoped Waggle project memory.
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。
Process meeting recordings and notes into structured decisions, action items, and team dynamics with intelligent noise filtering
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。
Pick the right way to represent a dataset so a reader gets the finding in three seconds — a catalog of 20+ chart and diagram forms with when-to-use and failure modes, plus the encoding decisions that make any of them readable (takeaway headline, direct labels, kill the axis, highlight-and-mute, show the caveat). Style-agnostic — use with whatever palette or design system the destination already has. Use when charting survey results, benchmark data, usage metrics, or research findings for a post, brief, deck, or report, and whenever the default bar chart feels like it's burying the point.
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 planning an AISTATS project timeline from venue fit through abstract submission, full-paper upload, supplementary material, review release, author-reviewer discussion, decision, camera-ready, PMLR publication, registration, presentation, and artifact release, with backward-planning offsets for theory-plus-experiments papers.
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 you need to understand how American Anthropologist (AA) evaluates a manuscript — editorial screening, anonymous peer review under an ethics of care, the four-field editorial board, decision categories, and how section choice shapes the path. Sets expectations and shapes the paper to survive review; it does not contact editors.
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 drafting AISTATS author responses or author-reviewer discussion replies under OpenReview, covering text-only discussion, no-link guidance, no revised-paper upload, anonymity requirements, statistician-reviewer pushback patterns, and decision-focused clarification strategy for theory-plus-experiments papers.
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。