「diff」の検索結果

Stress-test a finding against the choices you did not make. Enumerates the discrete forks a competent analyst could have taken (measure definition, sample filter, control set, clustering level, weighting, functional form), runs the specification grid, and reports the distribution rather than a point estimate — then attacks the identifying assumption with named, computable sensitivity statistics. Use when the user says "is this robust", "challenge this result", "specification curve", "multiverse", "how sensitive is this", "what if I'd used a different measure", "stress-test my estimate", or before a result becomes a headline claim. NOT a reviewer of prose or code — it challenges the CLAIM.

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。

Distill the current conversation into a structured note (decisions made, open questions, file pointers with line numbers, next 1–3 actions) and save to `quality_reports/session_logs/` before auto-compression. Differs from `/checkpoint` (explicit stop-point snapshot) and from auto-compaction (which truncates rather than distills). Use when context is approaching auto-compact threshold, when a long pipeline has accumulated many decisions, or when the user says "compress", "distil this session", "before we hit auto-compact", "structured handoff before context resets".

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 two implementations of the same thing — a port (R↔Python↔Stata), a reimplementation, a replication package, a refactor, or a new version against the old — so that agreement means something. Freeze inputs first, inventory every expected output, test the comparator itself, compare every channel (not just the headline number), and give each divergence a stable ID and a smallest witness. Use for cross-language parity, replication, upgrade/regression gates, or whenever "the numbers match" is about to license a claim.

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 an external frontier-model referee (Claude Code -> a different vendor's frontier model via the Oracle CLI) on a paper, proof, estimator, or replication package -- and adjudicate what comes back. Use when the user says "send this to oracle", "get an external review", "run a referee round", "deep-check this proof", or before a submission when an independent second opinion is worth more than another in-house pass. Never launches bare: brief first, evidence-forcing prompt, coverage manifest, then CONFIRMED/REFUTED/DOWNGRADED triage.

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。

Leverage OpenAI Codex/GPT models for autonomous code implementation, code review, and plan review. Triggers: "codex", "use gpt", "gpt-5", "let openai", "full-auto", "adversarial review", "second opinion review", "用codex", "让gpt实现", "对抗式审查", "让codex审查计划", "第二意见". Use this skill whenever the user wants to delegate coding tasks to OpenAI models, run code or plan reviews via codex, get a second-opinion review from a different model, or execute tasks in a sandboxed environment.

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 a selective defect needs IS/IS-NOT difference analysis or a consequential option choice needs must/want weighting and adverse-consequence comparison.

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 an existing video ad for a different product or offer. Analyzes the source video's style, pacing, camera work, dialogue, and tone, then adapts and generates a new Seedance 2.0 video customized for the user's product. End-to-end workflow: input video → analysis → adapted prompt → generation → delivery. Use when someone says "clone this ad", "make this ad but for my product", "recreate this video for my brand", or provides a video ad and a product image asking for a similar video.

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。

Fast non-interactive briefing before any meeting — auto-detects your next calendar event, pulls relationship history, surfaces open commitments, and produces a one-page brief in under 30 seconds. Use this whenever the user says "brief me", "give me a quick brief", "what's coming up", "background on my next call", "who am I meeting next", "brief me on Sarah", "I have a call in 10 min", "quick rundown", or right before walking into a meeting. Different from /minutes-prep — brief is the fast hook-fireable version that doesn't ask questions and doesn't set goals. Use brief when speed matters; use prep when the user wants to think hard about goals first.

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。

Recover the first public timestamp and canonical major coverage for a newsjacking signal, then decide whether newer coverage is the same story, a different story, or a materially new development.

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。

Coordinates parallel investigation threads to simultaneously explore multiple hypotheses or root causes across different system areas. Use when debugging production incidents, slow API performance, multi-system integration failures, or complex bugs where the root cause is unclear and multiple plausible theories exist; when serial troubleshooting is too slow; or when multiple investigators can divide root-cause analysis work. Provides structured phases for problem decomposition, thread assignment, sync points with Continue/Pivot/Converge decisions, and final report synthesis.

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。

Maintenance orchestrator for the brooks-lint plugin itself. Runs a sequential subagent pipeline — author → eval → QA → trigger-audit → release — to add or edit a skill, refresh the eval suite, keep the four manifests + all README translations + CHANGELOG + AGENTS/GEMINI in sync, audit trigger boundaries, and cut releases. Drives the five agents in .codex/agents/ (skill-author, eval-curator, consistency-qa, trigger-boundary-auditor, release-manager). Triggers when the maintainer asks to work ON brooks-lint itself: "add a new skill", "edit the brooks-debt guide", "update the eval suite", "fix the trigger descriptions", "make this change and validate it", "release brooks-lint", "bump and publish", and follow-ups: "re-run", "re-validate", "update that skill", "redo the audit", "do the X part again". Do NOT trigger for: USING the brooks-lint analysis skills on some target codebase (that's brooks-review / brooks-audit / brooks-debt / brooks-test / brooks-health / brooks-sweep); generic questions about brooks-lint that don't ask to change it; or maintenance of a different plugin.

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。

PR code review that surfaces decay risks, design smells, and maintainability issues with concrete Symptom → Source → Consequence → Remedy findings, drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user asks to review code, check a PR, shares a diff or pastes code asking "does this look right?" / "any issues here?" / "ready to merge?", or asks for feedback on a function, class, or file. Also triggers when user mentions: code smells / refactoring / clean architecture / DDD / SOLID principles / Hyrum's Law / deep modules / tactical programming / conceptual integrity / Brooks's Law / Mythical Man-Month / second system effect. Do NOT trigger for: questions about how to write code from scratch, language syntax questions, or framework/tool questions where no existing code is shared.

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。

Maintenance orchestrator for the brooks-lint plugin itself. Runs a sequential subagent pipeline — author → eval → QA → trigger-audit → release — to add or edit a skill, refresh the eval suite, keep the four manifests + all README translations + CHANGELOG + AGENTS/GEMINI in sync, audit trigger boundaries, and cut releases. Drives the five agents in .claude/agents/ (skill-author, eval-curator, consistency-qa, trigger-boundary-auditor, release-manager). Triggers when the maintainer asks to work ON brooks-lint itself: "add a new skill", "edit the brooks-debt guide", "update the eval suite", "fix the trigger descriptions", "make this change and validate it", "release brooks-lint", "bump and publish", and follow-ups: "re-run", "re-validate", "update that skill", "redo the audit", "do the X part again". Do NOT trigger for: USING the brooks-lint analysis skills on some target codebase (that's brooks-review / brooks-audit / brooks-debt / brooks-test / brooks-health / brooks-sweep); generic questions about brooks-lint that don't ask to change it; or maintenance of a different plugin.

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 Git configuration with one read-only baseline command, then propose confirmed, non-destructive fixes for identity, editor, and diff and merge tooling, with signing and safe.directory help only on request. Use when setting up or checking Git on a workstation.

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 evaluation datasets and supporting documentation for AI systems and agents, covering the scoping interview, difficulty distribution, dataset contract, sample review, and metric and tooling selection. Use when building or reviewing an evaluation set for a conversational agent, assistant, or retrieval-grounded AI system.

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 /document `pr` | `changelog` | `release-note` | `postmortem` (or let it ask) to write the human facing prose about a change. Drafts from the real commits and diff, writing to the right place. Does not write code, tests, or specs.

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。

Land the winning experiment from an evo run as a clean, mergeable change -- open a PR when the repo has a remote, otherwise merge into the working branch. Distills the best-scoring experiment down to the minimal diff that reproduces its behaviour, shaped for the qualities a maintainer merges on (scope discipline, test integrity, style adherence), then attaches an advisory mergeability report. Use when the user invokes /evo:ship, asks to land/merge/ship the best result, or wants to turn a finished optimization into a pull request.

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。

MUST be used right after changing any CLI color config (delta/bat/themes/lazygit pager) — renders the terminal's colored output to a PNG so Claude can actually SEE contrast, alignment, and highlighting instead of raw ANSI codes. Use for delta git diff colors, bat syntax highlighting, starship prompt, eza/ls colors, or ripgrep matches. Trigger phrases: 看终端效果, 终端截图, 验证配色, terminal screenshot.

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。

Ships pull requests to open-source projects you don't maintain — CONTRIBUTING compliance, PR-size/scope checks, minimal-diff implementation, AI-disclosure PR descriptions, and rebase or bot-review replies. Use for 提 PR / 上游 PR / 贡献代码, "open a PR", "fix this upstream", "rebase against main", "respond to the bot review". Not for reviewing PRs as maintainer (use github-review-pr) or general GitHub CRUD (use github-ops).

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。

Audits, diffs, copies, and lists providers/models, adds models, and switches the default model in local openclaw.json configs; diagnoses gateway/plugin failures (down, parked, broken, or out of date after an upgrade). Use for 虾/龙虾 config audits. Not for model-error repair (use openclaw-model-switch).

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。

Diagnoses and designs safe Terraform releases, provisioners (remote-exec/local-exec/file, cloud-init, Compose, Caddy), multi-environment isolation, and fresh-host bootstrap. Use when writing or reviewing plan/apply wrappers or provisioners; when staging/production config may differ; when a rollout can mutate a shared gateway; or debugging drift, TLS, container restarts, DNS duplication, or snapshot contamination.

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。

This skill should be used when comparing two videos to analyze compression results or quality differences. Generates interactive HTML reports with quality metrics (PSNR, SSIM) and frame-by-frame visual comparisons. Triggers when users mention "compare videos", "video quality", "compression analysis", "before/after compression", or request quality assessment of compressed videos.

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 a pull request or diff like a thoughtful senior engineer — prioritized, kind, and focused on what matters. Use when reviewing code, giving PR feedback, or asked to 'review this change'. Produces a structured review: a correctness/design pass, comments ranked by severity (blocking → nit), what's done well, and a clear approve / request-changes call — feedback that improves the code and the author.

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。

Spot a bad client before you sign — the warning signs of the projects that turn into unpaid, scope-creeping nightmares, and how to screen, price, or decline them. Use when asked is this client a red flag, should I take this client, screening a difficult client, or how to avoid bad clients. Produces a read on the warning signs present (haggling, vagueness, disrespect, urgency, unrealistic expectations), what each predicts, screening questions to ask before committing, protective terms if you proceed anyway, and how to decline gracefully — so you avoid the clients who cost more than they pay.

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。