「how to」の検索結果

Turn any source that describes how a kind of task gets done (a SKILL.md, a chat log, a runbook, plain prose) into a runnable Morph trace. Lift it into a DAG, write a contract per step, place inputs, and drive the full run lifecycle to verify it. Use whenever someone wants to make a trace from a source.

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。

Write SEO-optimized blog posts, landing pages, and long-form page copy following Google's E-E-A-T and Helpful Content guidelines. Handles new content creation from a keyword, topic, or brief, and full-page rewrites. Use when asked to "write a blog post", "create a landing page", "write content about X", "content for keyword X", "draft an article", "blog post about", "landing page for", "service page", "product page copy", "rewrite this page", "how-to guide", or "listicle". NOT for analyzing/auditing existing content (seo-geo-optimizer, content-quality-auditor), title tags or meta descriptions (meta-tags-optimizer), or keyword expansion (keyword-research) — those skills own their triggers.

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。

Runs a product quality review on a journey, feature, landing page, onboarding flow, or AI/agent surface and returns a friction log, a scored critical-journey review, and a taste bar your team can calibrate against. Use when someone asks is this good enough to ship, how polished should it be, why do users bounce, what is our quality bar, how do we build taste, or to review a design, prototype, onboarding, or checkout. Draws on 264 insights from 100 Lenny's Podcast guests incl. Katie Dill, Dylan Field and Stewart Butterfield.

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 why your product team ships slowly and produces a velocity plan with a baseline, a bottleneck map, the top 3 interventions and a stop-doing list. Use it when you say 'we're too slow', 'how do we ship faster', 'projects keep slipping', 'too many meetings', 'approvals take forever', 'our releases are scary', 'velocity', 'cycle time', 'we hired more people and nothing got faster' or 'AI made coding fast but we still ship slowly'. Draws on 226 Lenny's Podcast guests including Farhan Thawar, Nicole Forsgren and Melissa Perri.

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 a career question into a decision brief the PM can act on this week - a career plan, a promotion case, a stay-or-leave verdict, a job-search system, or an offer-negotiation script. Use when someone says 'how do I get promoted', 'should I leave my job', 'job search', 'I got laid off', 'negotiate my offer', 'career plan', 'IC or manager', 'next role', 'am I stuck', 'how do I stay relevant with AI' or 'how do I break into PM'. Draws on 188 Lenny's Podcast guests including Phyl Terry, Nikhyl Singhal and Deb Liu.

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。

Builds a product strategy and stress-tests your moat, then writes a one-page strategy doc (diagnosis, where to play, how to win, guiding policy, coherent actions, moat verdicts). Use for 'we need a product strategy', 'is our moat real', 'do we have a competitive advantage', 'where should we play', 'defensibility', 'should we expand into X', 'our roadmap has no strategy', or 'write a product vision'. Draws on 909 insights from 236 Lenny's Podcast guests incl. Roger Martin, Richard Rumelt and Hamilton Helmer.

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 analyzing binaries, executables, or bytecode to understand what they do or how they work. Triggers on "binary", "executable", "ELF", "what does this do", "reverse engineer", "disassemble", "decompile", "pyc file", "python bytecode", "analyze binary", "figure out", "marshal". Routes to sub-skills for triage, static analysis, dynamic analysis, synthesis, or tool setup.

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。

Diagrams and checkable docs from a codebase. Draws ERDs, C4 context/container/component views, API endpoint catalogues, lifecycle/state machines, sequence diagrams, and service-to-service call maps as a validated JSON spec plus a standalone HTML viewer, with Mermaid export. Imports OpenAPI, GraphQL SDL and Prisma; otherwise reads the code (NestJS, TypeORM, Express) and writes the spec. Use for: database diagram, ERD, data model, table relationships, C4 or architecture diagram, system context, API map, endpoint list, "show me the endpoints", status flow, state machine, allowed transitions, "what happens after X is approved", sequence diagram, request flow, how services call each other, microservice map, Mermaid diagram. Also writes documentation as a fact graph: each statement carries its source and a computed confidence, and a drift check fails CI when the code moves. Use to document a system, write architecture or onboarding docs, or explain how a system works.

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 user wants to configure and launch a WorkBuddy Bench evaluation run from scratch, or is unsure how to set one up. Walks them interactively through environment setup, model config, .env credentials, job config, and launching the run, then hands off to wbbench-report-skills for metrics and trajectory analysis.

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。

How to write modern Swift well — modeling with value types, Swift 6 data-race safety and approachable concurrency (@concurrent, main-actor-by-default, actors, task groups), protocols and generics (some vs any), API design, performance and ARC, Swift Testing, macros, and the modern language features agents don't know about yet. Use when writing, reviewing, or migrating Swift. Only runs when explicitly invoked; it does not trigger on its own.

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。

Guided, hands-on course teaching architects how to use Codex or Claude Code — six short modules, each built around an exercise on a bundled sandbox project (a fictional Brooklyn art museum expansion). Resumable across sessions via PROGRESS.md. Use when the user runs $learn or /as:learn, says they're new to AI-assisted project work, or asks how to learn 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。

Use when a user wants step-by-step help making an audio-first image-story, AI narration, slideshow, illustrated story, AI 讲书, 图片联播, 有声故事, or 静态图叙事视频 with Codex or WorkBuddy; not for a standalone script, single image, or ordinary video editing.

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。

Fixes broken decks/PDFs exported from Claude's "Design" feature (or similar AI deck generators) — cut-off or clipped text, wrong/substituted fonts, and corrupted .pptx package structure that shows up only once you export to PDF, not while looking at it in the app. Use this skill whenever the user uploads a zip, .pptx, or .pdf exported from Claude Design (or mentions "Design" export, an AI-generated deck, or a generated slide deck/PDF) AND reports it looking broken, wrong, cut off, garbled, or different from the original when opened, printed, or converted to PDF — even if they don't use the word "repair" or name the specific defect. Also trigger for general "my exported PDF/deck is broken, help fix it" requests when the file was clearly produced by an AI design/deck tool rather than hand-authored. Produces both a repaired, still-editable .pptx and a clean PDF, plus a report of exactly what was wrong and what changed.

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。

Same pixels, fewer tokens — for user-facing deliverables where visual polish is the spec. Use when building or editing a landing page, marketing site, hero, pricing/feature section, dashboard, or any HTML/CSS UI component. Keeps the full rendered design (layout depth, hierarchy, motion, responsive richness, a11y) and cuts tokens by expressing that design densely — CSS custom properties, shared classes, shorthand, fluid units — instead of by cutting the design. The honey core trims code and prose; this trims how the design is *written*, never how it looks. Reach for it whenever output is user-facing markup, even if the user never says "minimal".

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。

Report this session's output tokens and CO₂ by running the repo's committed EcoLogits port, plus the modelled CO₂/$ saved vs a no-Honey baseline — always labelled with the bench stamp it came from. Use when asked how much Honey saved, the session's carbon/token footprint, or to expand the 🍯 statusline badge into a full breakdown.

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。

Shared discipline for every hunt-* skill: scope and authorization gating, the two-account rule, the confirmation gate that separates a real finding from a false positive, enumeration limits, stop conditions, marker discipline, wiki-first query and self-heal, FIND output, Deadends, and wiki distillation. ALWAYS LOADED alongside any hunt skill. Also trigger directly on "is this in scope", "is this a real bug", "how do I confirm this", "should I keep going", "how many IDs should I test", "what severity", "how do I report this", "I got someone else's data". Every hunt-* skill assumes this file; without it they run without their safety and quality layer.

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-engagement knowledge harvest AND harness retrospective - after a box/bugbounty/pentest/CTF is completed, first diff how the engagement was EXECUTED against the skills/hooks that governed it (what discipline was skipped) and improve the harness, then sweep the whole engagement for GENERIC reusable knowledge NOT already in wiki/ and land it via the leak-gated stage->promote pipeline. Use at close-out or when asked to "extract learnings", "what did we learn", "harvest lessons into wiki", "distill this engagement", "post-mortem into the wiki", "what did we do wrong", "improve the harness from this box".

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 the user decide what to charge and how to package it: the value metric, the tiers, the free-to-paid line, and finding the actual number. Use when the user is guessing at a price, priced too cheap and can't change it, is stuck on free vs paid, or believes "developers won't pay" so never charges.

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 deep architectural analysis of a specified module, directory, or feature area by examining structural coupling, data flow, concurrency patterns, risk, and SOLID alignment. Use when the user wants to assess, evaluate, or review the architecture, design quality, dependency structure, coupling, cohesion, or technical debt of an existing part of the codebase. Not for investigating specific bugs, runtime errors, or failures — use investigate. Not for test planning — use automated-test-planning. Not for file-level code review — use code-review. Not for researching open-ended options, prior art, or how something works — use research. Not for designing a new interface or contract — use design-an-api. Not for planning the change its findings imply — use plan-a-change. Not for discovering bounded contexts, ubiquitous language, or where code boundaries diverge from domain boundaries — use ddd-analysis. Not for writing documentation or architectural 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。

Builds a feature implementation plan from an existing feature specification (or equivalent context) through a facilitated team conversation. Use when the user wants to plan how to implement, build, deliver, or ship a feature that has already been specified. Does not specify what the feature should do — use plan-a-feature first. Does not design the contract for an interface — use design-an-api. Does not refine or stress-test an already-written plan — use iterative-plan-review. Runs its resolution rounds to completion and holds its questions until after they finish; to review each round 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。

Researches an open-ended question — options, possible solutions, prior art, trade-offs, or how something works — and produces a durable, evidence-backed, adversarially-validated report that recommends an option without committing the team to any artifact. Use when you want to research approaches, weigh options, survey prior art or the state of the art, or understand how something works before committing to a direction. Does not diagnose a bug, failure, or root cause — use investigate. Does not specify a feature — use plan-a-feature. Does not create or update a coding standard — use coding-standard. Does not compare two concrete artifacts for gaps — use gap-analysis. Does not assess an existing module's architecture — use architectural-analysis. Does not capture feedback on Han's own skills — use han-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。

Evidence-based investigation of issues, bugs, API calls, integrations, and other aspects of software development that need a deep dive to find the root cause and solutions. Use when you need to debug, troubleshoot, diagnose, or figure out why something is broken. Does not review code for quality or style — use code-review for auditing changes or post-code-review-to-pr for posting review feedback to GitHub. Does not assess architectural health or structural risk — use architectural-analysis for architectural concerns. Does not research open-ended options, prior art, or how something works when nothing is broken — use research for that. Does not plan the structural change a root cause calls for — use plan-a-change. Does not map bounded contexts or domain boundaries — use ddd-analysis. Does not capture feedback on Han's own skills — use han-feedback for that.

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。

After you give a substantive answer or draft that the user may act on — advice or recommendations, drafted artifacts such as goals, plans, pitches, proposals, or emails, estimates or projections, analysis or interpretation of data, factual claims they may rely on, or a multi-step argument — invoke this skill BEFORE finalizing your reply and then, if it applies, append 2-3 short follow-up questions, each tied to something specific in what you just produced, that help the user check key facts, probe the reasoning or assumptions, and notice missing context. Do this at most once per conversation. Skip it when the user asked a trivial how-to or simple lookup, wants a purely educational explanation, asked you only to format, convert, or assemble a file from content they provided, is writing code they will run, is doing creative writing or casual chat, or already asked you to double-check, cite, or review — the skill file explains these boundaries and the exact output 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。

Define go-to-market strategy including launch plan, messaging, channels, and timing during PRD v0.9 Go-to-Market. Triggers on requests to plan launch, define GTM strategy, or when user asks "how do we launch?", "go-to-market", "launch plan", "marketing strategy", "messaging", "launch channels", "GTM". Outputs GTM- entries with launch plan components.

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。