「executing」の検索結果

Use when starting analysis work that needs isolation, or before executing a pre-registered plan - ensures an isolated, reproducible workspace with pinned environment, fixed seeds, and immutable raw data

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。

Stack Honey onto Superpowers-style workflows (subagent-driven-development, dispatching-parallel-agents, executing-plans) and any orchestration that dispatches fresh subagents. Dispatched subagents run in isolated context and do NOT inherit the session's Honey hook, so they emit full-fat code and verbose reports. Use when you are about to dispatch implementer/reviewer/fixer/parallel subagents: it gives the exact Honey directive to paste into each dispatch prompt, with a worker variant and a reviewer variant, so the levers apply inside the subagents too — where the multiplied cost actually is.

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。

Address PR reviewer feedback by evaluating comments, proposing fixes, and executing after user approval. Use when the user wants to handle review comments on an existing PR, address PR feedback, fix PR comments, respond to reviewer suggestions, or process code review feedback. Triggers on "address PR feedback", "handle review comments", "fix PR comments", "respond to PR review", "process reviewer feedback", or when given a PR number/URL with intent to address its comments.

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 whether a repository's coding-agent harness can reliably carry work from intent through controlled execution, verification, delivery, and learning. Use when asked to assess agent readiness, repeated agent failures, Rules/Skills/Hooks/Memory effectiveness, missing validation or recovery loops, or whether a harness repair improved later outcomes. Do not use for code-only audits, AGENTS-only audits, individual skill reliability reviews, or executing the task itself.

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。

Restructure existing code without changing its behavior, through a test-gated refactoring loop: a named target, a green suite over that target before any edit, a planned sequence of small named refactorings, and the full suite re-run after every step. Use when the user wants to refactor, restructure, clean up, simplify, or improve the design of existing code, or to apply refactoring recommendations from a code-review or architectural-analysis report. This skill changes code; it does not review code (use code-review), assess architecture (use architectural-analysis), plan a multi-module restructure before executing it (use plan-a-change), map domain boundaries before restructuring along them (use ddd-analysis), or build new behavior test-first (use tdd). Do not use it on code inside an active tdd loop; the refactor step of tdd owns that cleanup. Runs its planned sequence to completion without pausing for review; to review each named refactoring as it lands, use pairing.

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。

Performs abstract interpretation over source code to infer possible program states, variable ranges, and data properties without executing the program. Reports potential runtime errors including out-of-bounds accesses, null dereferences, type inconsistencies, division by zero, and integer overflows. Use when analyzing code for potential runtime errors, performing static analysis, checking safety properties, or verifying program behavior without execution.

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 JavaScript at bundle time and inline results. Use when optimizing compile-time code generation, embedding files, inlining environment variables, or executing code during the bundling process.

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。

Provider-independent production workflow for agents assembling, auditing, executing, and handing off ComfyUI node-graph workflows for image, video, upscale, inpaint, conditioning, and batch media generation; use when a task involves ComfyUI workflow JSON/API graphs, model and custom-node inventories, reproducibility, provenance, safety/rights review, local or cloud execution hygiene, or production QA.

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。

Create a detailed, phased implementation plan with documentation discovery. Use when asked to plan a feature, task, or multi-step implementation — especially before executing with do.

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。

Guides God Committee members through executing interventions. Use for repairs, rollbacks, and emergency actions. Triggers on: intervention, repair, rollback, emergency action.

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 features and fix bugs test-first, the Canon TDD way (test list → one test → make it pass → refactor → repeat). Use when implementing any new feature, endpoint, model, or method, fixing a bug, or executing a plan — write the test list and a failing test BEFORE production 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。

The checkpoint coordinator for /feature. Routed to by /feature once a writing-plans plan exists. Uses authored HTML checkpoints or bounded legacy batches, delegates each scope to subagent-driven-development (fresh author agent per task, full review chain, fresh verification), then stops for a human checkpoint before the next batch. The checkpointed counterpart to /sprint's autonomous run.

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 implementation engine. Routed to by /sprint (full plan, autonomous) and by executing-plans (scoped batch, checkpoint-gated). One fresh subagent per task — test-first via tdd — followed by spec-compliance review, quality review, and fresh-run verification. No single context accumulates drift, and nothing is accepted on a subagent's word.

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。

Turns open-ended requests into things to think WITH instead of answers to accept. Audits the hidden assumptions inside a topic, inverts them into sharp "what if" provocations, branches each one outward, and delivers a mind map plus written wonderings. Portable version, no vendor-specific tools required, works on any conversational assistant. Fire this when the person signals they want to open up a space and think alongside the assistant: "wonder about X", "what are the weird angles on X", "help me think about what this could be", "I want to explore, not decide yet". Do NOT fire when the same topic is attached to a request for concrete, usable, or decided output: a named deliverable, a count ("give me 5 names"), a deadline, or a "which / what should I pick" question. When it is genuinely unclear which they want, this skill opens by asking one line rather than branching. Not for factual lookups or executing a plan already chosen.

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。

Turns open-ended requests into things to think WITH instead of answers to accept. Audits the hidden assumptions inside a topic, inverts them into sharp "what if" provocations, branches each one outward, and delivers a fully-expanded mind map image plus the written wonderings. Fire this when the person signals they want to open up a space and think alongside you — "wonder about X", "what are the weird angles on X", "help me think about what this could be", "I want to explore, not decide yet" — or when they invoke /wonder or /wonderpill. Do NOT fire when the same topic is attached to a request for concrete, usable, or decided output: a named deliverable, a count ("give me 5 names"), a deadline ("ideas I can ship this week"), or a "which / what should I pick" question — those want straight answers, not a wonder pill. When it is genuinely unclear which they want, this skill opens by asking one line rather than branching. Not for factual lookups or executing a plan already chosen.

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。

Next-action selector for the Suede pack: inspects current repo, terminal, plan, or handoff state read-only and returns one recommended next move plus a short, self-contained copy/paste prompt for it. Use when the user asks 'what's next', 'what should I do next', 'recommend the next move', 'give me the prompt', 'expand prompt', or 'make it granular', especially after a review, audit, plan, or stalled task. NOT FOR: executing the recommended action without the user's separate authorization, or coordinating a multi-lane build across specialists (use suede-agent-teams).

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。

Suede-owned referral and affiliate program discipline. Use when designing refer-a-friend mechanics, ambassador or partner incentives, fraud controls, attribution, payout logic, or viral-loop measurement. NOT FOR: executing payouts or changing billing, launch-wide packaging (use suede-launch-packaging), lifecycle messaging (use suede-emails), or reporting unverified referral lift.

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。

Suede-owned pricing and packaging discipline. Use when deciding what to charge, structuring tiers, choosing a value metric, comparing free trials with freemium, researching willingness to pay, planning a price increase, or tearing down a pricing page for clarity and AI-readability. NOT FOR: in-product upgrade screens (use suede-paywalls), offer bonuses and guarantees (use suede-offers), or executing billing 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。

Suede-owned operations-architecture discipline that fixes the shape of a system before anyone builds it: entity schema first, exactly one write path per entity, every unit of work routed to a deterministic automation, an AI agent, or a human decision, every existing tool marked absorb, keep, or kill, and the build sequenced into phases whose completion is proved by a command. Use when scoping an automation or agent build, deciding whether a workflow needs a model at all, consolidating a sprawling tool stack, designing the data model under a workflow, choosing a migration path off an old system, or ordering a build so nothing lands on a moving foundation. NOT FOR: executing a planned multi-file repo change (use suede-graph-flo-xr); coordinating parallel builders with file ownership (use suede-agent-teams); lead lifecycle, scoring, and CRM routing rules (use suede-revops); proving agent output quality against an eval set (use suede-ai-eval); reviewing the finished diff (use suede-code-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。

Suede-affiliated marketing deliberation that applies documented public frameworks through clearly labeled simulated advisors, surfaces disagreements, and synthesizes a decision. Use when the user wants multiple expert lenses on one bounded marketing question. NOT FOR: factual claims about a living person's private views, primary research (use suede-customer-research), or executing the selected tactic (route to the relevant public Suede skill).

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。

Structured planning mode for AI agents working on coding and development tasks. Produces a comprehensive plan BEFORE any code is written or changed, including task decomposition, architecture decisions, risk assessment, and approval gates. Use this skill whenever the user says "/plan", "plan mode", "plan first", "think before coding", "make a plan", or asks the agent to plan before executing. Also trigger when the user describes a complex multi-step development task and would clearly benefit from structured planning before implementation — especially for tasks involving new features, refactors, migrations, infrastructure changes, or multi-file edits. When in doubt, plan. A few minutes of planning prevents hours of rework.

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 wants to know if something works — the answer requires running code, not analyzing it. Output is a verdict backed by evidence: passed, failed, or broken. Primary triggers: 'run the tests', 'does X still work after my change?', 'did the merge break anything?', 'verify the fix worked', 'check if the endpoint returns X', 'confirm nothing regressed', 'run tests/unit/test_foo.py', 'let me know the results', 'make sure my changes didn't break anything'. Hard stops — do NOT use for: reviewing test code for quality/coverage gaps, debugging why test infrastructure/databases/seed scripts are misbehaving, writing or fixing tests, diagnosing root causes of unexpected behavior. The deciding question: is the user asking for the result of executing something, or asking for help understanding/analyzing/improving something? If it's the latter, use diagnose or review-code 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 verifying a running application end-to-end through its real interface — a web UI, a CLI, or a TUI — by writing and executing agent-run "scenario cards" against a freshly built instance with falsifiable assertions. Trigger on "test it end to end", "prove the UI actually works", "write/run a scenario", or after a change touches a user-facing surface that unit tests can't fully cover. Not for unit tests, pure code review, or API-only checks.

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 at the start of every QA round - recording the case matrix with record_test_cases (categories, criterion links, rejected cases) before touching the app, then executing all of it

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。