「diff」の検索結果

Evaluate code (especially LLM-generated) for structural simplicity using Rich Hickey's "Simple Made Easy" framework. Use this skill whenever reviewing a PR, diff, or code snippet for accidental complexity — particularly when the code was generated by an AI coding assistant and line-by-line review isn't feasible. Also use when the user asks about complecting, simplicity vs. easiness, structural coupling, or concept deduplication. Trigger on phrases like "is this simple", "does this complect", "review for complexity", "structural analysis", or any reference to Hickey, Simple Made Easy, or grey-box 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。

Adversarial "perfection" review — hold a change to an *ideal* bar, not just a correct one, assuming eternal time, unlimited energy, and no ship pressure. Use when the user asks to review "for perfection", to make a defect "impossible to express", or to hunt where a defect "relocates" across review rounds. Grounds every claim in the diff, fans out adversarial verifiers via Workflow, and reports residual surfaces with a structural fix for each. ONLY invoke when the user explicitly asks for a perfection / ideal-bar 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。

Run an automated codex⇄Claude debate to consensus — no round cap, no deadlock exit. Two explicit subcommands. `review` (also the bare/back-compat default) — codex (reviewer) critiques the current diff and a Claude subagent (author) fixes/disputes, looping until they agree. `answer` — Claude and codex each answer a freeform prompt in parallel, then cross-check until they agree, and a unified answer is returned. Use when the user types `/codex-debate`, asks to "have codex review this", "run the codex debate", "review this PR with codex", "argue this with codex until you agree", or passes a question to "have Claude and codex debate/answer until they agree".

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 architecture and module boundaries for volatility-based decomposition using Juval Lowy's framework (from "Righting Software", building on Parnas 1972). Use when reviewing module splits, service boundaries, new abstractions, or any decomposition decision. Trigger on phrases like "where should this boundary be", "how to split this", "module boundaries", "encapsulate change", "volatility", or references to Lowy, Parnas, or "Righting Software". Complements /hickey (interleaved concerns) with a different lens (change encapsulation).

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。

EU NIS2 Directive (Directive (EU) 2022/2555) compliance advisor for essential and important entities: entity classification, Art. 21 risk management measures, Art. 23 incident reporting timelines (24h/72h/1 month), Art. 20 governance obligations, supply chain security (Art. 21(2)(d); coordinated risk assessments Art. 22), gap assessments, policy drafting, ISO 27001 alignment, and penalty exposure analysis. Also covers Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, the technical/methodological sub-requirements for Art. 21(2) and the significant-incident thresholds binding on DNS/cloud/data-centre/MSP/MSSP/trust-service and other digital entities. Use for NIS2 readiness, transposition questions, ENISA technical implementation guidance, significant-incident thresholds, supervisory differences between essential and important entities, and cross-border coordination.

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。

Discovers and injects project-specific coding guidelines from .trellis/spec/ before implementation begins. Reads spec indexes, pre-development checklists, and shared thinking guides for the target package. Use when starting a new coding task, before writing any code, switching to a different package, or needing to refresh project conventions and standards.

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。

WeChat Official Account topic planning and content calendar management. Based on WeChat article search and trending analysis, generates differentiated topic recommendations and outputs structured content calendars. Activated when users mention "topic", "planning", "content calendar", "trending", or "what to write next week".

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。

Cascades strategy from boardroom to individual contributor and detects misalignment. Use when teams pull in different directions, OKRs don't connect, departments optimize locally at company expense, or strategy doesn't translate to 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。

Test and evaluation harness for AI agents — scenario suites, deterministic replay, regression diffing, cost and latency budgets. Use when agent quality is vibe-checked, before shipping a prompt or model change, or when evals drift.

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 consumer panel. Spins up a swarm of buyer sub-agents (default 100, --quick for 20) trained on the user's target customer, each with a different income, age, buying behaviour and objection, shows every one the same pitch, and runs the business through 100 buyer scenarios to see who buys, who doesn't, and why. Tallies the answers into buy rates by segment, the reasons people pass in their own words, what would flip a no, and price answers for founder-pricing. Use when the user says "would people buy this", "test it on customers", "run the consumer panel", "simulate buyers", "who is my customer", or "validate demand".

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。

Quantum machine learning and differentiable quantum computing

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。

Pre-landing PR review with two-pass checklist. Pass 1 critical: SQL safety, race conditions, LLM trust boundaries, enum completeness. Pass 2 informational: side effects, magic numbers, dead code, test gaps. Adversarial review auto-scaled by diff size. Scope drift detection.

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。

Live-site visual QA audit with fix loop. 10-category checklist (~80 items) including AI Slop Detection (10 blacklisted patterns). Atomic commits per fix. Before/after screenshots. A-F grading. Parallel cross-model code-level design audit. Modes: Full, Quick, Deep, Diff-aware, Regression.

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。

Systematically QA test a web application with browser-based bug fixing. Four modes: diff-aware (automatic on feature branches), full (systematic exploration), quick (30-second smoke test), regression (compare against baseline). Atomic bug-fix workflow with regression testing. Health scoring across 8 categories.

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。

Analyzes code diffs and files to identify bugs, security vulnerabilities, code smells, and architectural concerns, then produces a structured review report with prioritized, actionable feedback.

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。

Map the competitive narrative landscape and score unclaimed positioning gaps. "find us a differentiated position"

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 authoring a Relayflows flow (@relayflows/surface / @relayflows/sdk, the journal-based v2 engine — the CLI is `flows`, package versions 2.0.x) in TypeScript or YAML/JSON. Covers the three-rung ladder (run/llm/agent), the resident verbs (human/dispatch/done), verification gates, TypeScript vs YAML authoring, per-step cli/model selection and its resolution order, flows.json, and `flows check`/`run`/`resume` with their real refusal shapes and exit codes. Not for the older, unrelated `@relayflows/core` WorkflowBuilder engine (`.pattern('dag')`/.agent()/.step() chains) that `writing-agent-relay-workflows` and `migrating-persona-to-relayflow` cover — that's a different product despite the similar name.

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 needs to design evaluation datasets, create test cases, stratify samples, generate adversarial examples, extract eval dimensions from traces/specs, or build a labeled evaluation set. Also use when the user mentions test data design, eval coverage, difficulty stratification, synthetic data generation for eval, or "how to create good evaluation data." Outputs datasets in OpenJudge-compatible format.

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 learner teaches the concept to the AI, which plays a curious novice peer and identifies gaps through authentic questions. Use when the learner wants to test their understanding — teaching forces a different kind of organisation than studying.

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。

Stage exploration before instruction on complex problems. The learner produces two attempted approaches before consolidation — which builds on those attempts, not from scratch. Use for genuinely hard problems where struggle produces deeper learning.

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 an existing lesson against UDL's three principles — engagement, representation, and action/expression. Identifies specific access barriers and suggests concrete modifications ranked by impact.

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 retrieval practice questions at varied difficulty levels for a topic or concept. Use when creating quiz starters, revision activities, or low-stakes testing materials.

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 blocked topic sequence into an interleaved plan with mixed practice across related topics. Use when planning units, homework schedules, or revision programmes.

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。

Adapt a historical primary source for classroom use — modifying complexity and length while preserving features for sourcing, close reading, and corroboration. Use when a primary source is too complex for the target age group.

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。