「invest」の検索結果

Plan implementation before coding: investigate the repo, write spec and plan, and validate with a peer. Use for "plan", "design approach", "scope", or any coding task needing a plan. Not system-design thinking (/ship:arch-design) or full /ship:auto.

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。

Comprehending and investigating codebases: structure mapping, feature discovery, data flow tracing for 'does X exist?' or 'how does Y work?'. Includes a conversational ask mode. Does not write 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 a practitioner inquiry cycle from research question through data collection to evidence-informed action. Use when starting action research, teacher-led investigation, or professional inquiry.

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 the scope and purpose of a complex inquiry before mapping or futures work begins. Use when a class or group needs to agree what they are investigating, who it matters to, and at what scale.

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 a project-based learning brief with a driving question, milestones, and assessment criteria. Use when planning PBL units, inquiry projects, or extended investigations.

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 a complete document-based history lesson using the Reading Like a Historian four-part structure. Use when planning a primary source inquiry lesson or converting a textbook lesson into document-based investigation.

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。

A harness that makes Opus (or any Claude model) behave like Fable — it enforces seeing a task through to the end, with evidence and verification, as procedure. Use when starting a multi-step task (2+ sequential stories), long autonomous work, debugging or root-cause investigation, building render/executable artifacts (HTML, SVG, games, charts), or when the user says "fablize", "see it through", "verify as you go", "split into goals".

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。

Diagnosis loop for bugs and failing behavior. Use for errors, stack traces, regressions, failed tests, issue-tracker bugs, stuck investigations after failed fixes, or asks to debug/fix a bug.

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。

Post-mortem investigation for failed GSD workflows — analyzes git history, artifacts, and state to diagnose what went 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。

Implement bounded features and fixes in existing or new mini-program codebases while preserving repository rules, user-owned changes, approved behavior, assets, framework conventions, and evidence boundaries. Use when users ask to write or modify mini-program code, implement a confirmed specification or architecture, add a scoped feature, remove behavior semantically, update internal documentation required by a change, or carry out a well-defined small fix that does not require root-cause investigation. Establishes a baseline and change boundary, applies test-driven small steps, distinguishes source from generators and build artifacts, verifies the affected contract, and never reports source completion as device validation, formal acceptance, upload, or release.

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 for Korean (Hangul) fan translations of retro console or PC games, including ROM or disc analysis, text-engine reverse engineering, Hangul fonts and custom encodings, script extraction and reinsertion, code hooks, reproducible product builds, and emulator verification. Apply it to new investigations and follow-up work in existing Korean-patch projects. 레트로 게임 한글화·한글패치·한글 패치·ROM 번역의 신규 조사와 기존 프로젝트 후속 작업에 사용한다.

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 and resolve Course Management Platform CloudWatch alert issues end to end. Use when Codex is asked to inspect a CMP GitHub alert issue, pull dev or production AWS logs, diagnose 5xx responses or failed background work, fix an incident with test-driven development, validate a fix in dev, or deploy and verify an authorized production 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。

Seed-stage growth playbook focused on channel selection and prioritization. Helps founders with product-market fit decide where to invest limited resources for maximum traction. By @WeiYipei.

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。

Enter explore mode - a thinking partner for exploring ideas, investigating problems, and clarifying requirements. Use when the user wants to think through something before or during 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。

Reviews Elixir code for performance issues including GenServer bottlenecks, memory usage, and concurrency patterns. Use when reviewing high-throughput code or investigating performance 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。

Enter explore mode - a thinking partner for exploring ideas, investigating problems, and clarifying requirements. Use when the user wants to think through something before or during 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。

Deeply scope a problem before coding: parallel Explore agents map related files, similar implementations, and test patterns, producing a problem definition, boundaries, and minimal implementation plan. Use when planning a feature, investigating a bug, or entering an unfamiliar codebase area.

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 method: 5-step root-cause analysis (capture, isolate, hypothesize, investigate, fix & verify) plus common bug-pattern reference. Use when errors, exceptions, test failures, or unexpected behavior appear. Loaded automatically by the debugger 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。

Enter explore mode - a thinking partner for exploring ideas, investigating problems, and clarifying requirements. Use when the user wants to think through something before or during 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。

Investigate performance bottlenecks and validate optimizations without weakening retrieval quality or correctness.

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 the reasoning of a document or argument (memo, proposal, investment analysis, board paper, article, the user's own draft): claims, evidence, unstated assumptions, logical gaps, fallacies, and what would falsify it, each anchored to quoted text. Use whenever the user wants reasoning examined, in any language ("audit this argument", "is this analysis sound", "poke holes in this proposal", "review the logic of my draft"; Vietnamese "phản biện giúp tôi", "soi lập luận này", "tài liệu này có lỗ hổng gì", "góp ý bản nháp của tôi"), even when they never say "critical thinking". Also use when the user drops a document and asks whether to trust or act on it, or asks to see their reasoning profile. Not for company-level strategic bets (strategy-board) or learning a topic through dialogue (socratic-questor).

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。

Side-by-side comparison of two financial scenarios (buy vs rent, new job vs stay, payoff house vs invest, Roth vs Traditional, lease vs buy car, etc). Projects each scenario over 10 years, compares total cost, opportunity cost, risk profile, and produces a structured recommendation. Output saved as FINANCE-COMPARE.md.

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。

Financial goal planner. Takes any goal (house down payment, college fund, wedding, sabbatical, business launch, car, vacation) and builds the required savings amount, monthly contribution, timeline, investment vehicle recommendation, milestone checkpoints, and adjustment scenarios. Supports multiple simultaneous goals with prioritization logic. Produces FINANCE-GOALS.md.

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。

Investment portfolio analyzer. Audits current allocation vs target, asset class diversification (stocks, bonds, real estate, alternatives), expense ratios, tax efficiency, rebalancing needs, factor tilts (value, momentum, quality), three-fund portfolio fit, target-date fund analysis, and Boglehead-style optimization. Produces FINANCE-PORTFOLIO.md with a portfolio score, specific rebalancing trades, and fund swap recommendations.

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。