「ide」の検索結果

Guides taking and defending Rule 30(b)(6) corporate representative depositions. Drafts topic lists with reasonable particularity, builds examination outlines for binding corporate admissions, analyzes noticed topics for objections, and prepares designees. Use when drafting 30(b)(6) notices, preparing corporate deposition topics, selecting or preparing designees, or defending corporate representative depositions.

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 the user asks to "implement a DiD regression", "run a staggered difference-in-differences", "set up an event study", "implement IV / 2SLS", "run a regression discontinuity design", "build synthetic control", "do propensity score matching", "test parallel trends", "run Honest DiD", "wild cluster bootstrap", "Callaway-Sant'Anna", "Sun-Abraham", "Bacon decomposition", "double machine learning", "debiased machine learning", "DML / DoubleML", "cross-fitting", "causal forest", "heterogeneous treatment effects", "ATE with ML controls", "which causal design fits my data", or needs causal-inference code, diagnostics, or identification writing in Python (StatsPAI), R, or Stata. Based on Scott Cunningham's Causal Inference: The Mixtape, with runnable validated templates, ML-based causal inference patterns, and Journal of Finance applications.

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。

QA a change by driving the running dev app like a real QA engineer - start the server and a real browser session, write a checklist from the agreed requirements and the diff, execute every item with evidence, then go looking for anything that looks off even where the diff did not touch. Reports findings by severity and separates regressions from pre-existing problems. Use after a change is implemented and the gates pass, when the user asks to "QA this", "test it in the app", or "check it actually 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。

Implement a change end-to-end from a freeform prompt - settle the requirements, design the engineering approach and get it approved, implement with TDD, run the format/compile/credo/coveralls gates without shortcuts, self-review the diff like a senior engineer, QA the finished change in the running app, record a demo video when it is visible there, then commit and open the PR. Use when the user wants to "complete an issue", "work the ticket", or hands over a description of something to build.

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 about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always

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 tradeoff analysis, or when the user must pick between concrete options: "A or B?", "which library should we use?", "build vs buy", "compare these approaches". Scores options on weighted criteria, tests sensitivity and reversibility. Skip for open ideation or single-option reviews.

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 describes a problem, decision or stuck situation but names no method: "how should I approach this?", "help me think this through", "we can't decide", "where do I start?". Picks the best-fit thinking method and runs it. Skip for plain execution tasks or when a method is named.

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 systems thinking, or when a change may ripple beyond its target: "what are the side effects?", "why does this keep coming back?", "how do these teams or services affect each other?". Maps loops, delays and leverage points. Skip for single-step fixes.

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 the 5 Whys, or when the user wants the root cause of a failure: "why did this happen?", "this keeps breaking", "write the postmortem", "find the real cause". Asks why repeatedly with evidence at each step, then sets countermeasures. Skip for one-off typos or when the cause is already proven.

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。

Pixel-faithful clone of any web UI into the user's existing stack, using whatever sources are available — a screenshot alone, a live URL, raw HTML/CSS, or any combination. Use this skill whenever the user wants to recreate, match, replicate, or "clone" a design from a screenshot, image, URL, Figma export, or HTML dump. Trigger on phrases like "clone this", "match this design", "build this from screenshot", "recreate this page", "make it look like this", "rebuild this UI", "copy this layout", or any time the user provides a visual reference and asks for a faithful implementation. Do not undertrigger — even if the user just drops a screenshot without explicit phrasing, this skill applies.

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。

Delegate implementation to Codex or to a sandboxed Claude Code (`claude -p`), have a model from the other vendor review the diff, send it back to iterate, gate on the full test suite, and ship it as a PR. Use this whenever the user wants Codex or a sandboxed Claude to write code, mentions handing off / delegating implementation to one of those backends, asks for a cross-vendor review of delegated code, asks to work through a plan or spec unit-by-unit with an implementation backend doing the coding, or wants a review-and-merge loop wrapped around delegated output — and also when resuming such a loop ("keep going", "next unit", "继续下一个"). It encodes constraints that are expensive to rediscover: the implementer runs in the real environment behind backend-specific git and publication boundaries, must not be pointed at a full test suite by default, and its self-report is a claim rather than evidence. This loop expects an approved plan or an equivalently precise spec; settle an unsolved high-level goal into a plan first, using the engineering-mode skill when it is installed.

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。

Delegate implementation work to a dedicated implementer subagent, then review its diff, send it back to iterate, gate on the full test suite, and ship it as a PR. Use this whenever the user wants a separate model to write code, mentions handing off / delegating implementation, asks to work through a plan or spec unit-by-unit with a subagent doing the coding, or wants a review-and-merge loop wrapped around delegated output — and also when resuming such a loop ("keep going", "next unit", "继续下一个"). It encodes constraints that are expensive to rediscover: the implementer self-reports success, must not run the full test suite by default, must not touch git, and its report is a claim rather than evidence. Cursor port of implementation-loop. This loop expects an approved plan or an equivalently precise spec; settle an unsolved high-level goal into a plan first, using the cursor-engineering-mode skill (it ships in this same 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。

Internal utility for the skills library itself — opt-in, local-first, privacy-respecting usage telemetry and update checks. Provides version checking, usage logging, and usage reporting for the skills in this repo. Use only when asked to view skill usage stats, configure telemetry opt-in/out, wire a skill to log its own runs, or check for skill updates.

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。

Provides comprehensive Tailwind CSS utility-first styling patterns including responsive design, layout utilities, flexbox, grid, spacing, typography, colors, and modern CSS best practices. Use when styling React/Vue/Svelte components, building responsive layouts, implementing design systems, or optimizing CSS workflow.

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 and improve web accessibility following WCAG 2.2 guidelines. Use when asked to "improve accessibility", "a11y audit", "WCAG compliance", "screen reader support", "keyboard navigation", or "make accessible".

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。

Code auditor that grades software projects and the agents/developers who built them. Produces structured JSON + Markdown reports with a standardized rubric. Evaluates architecture, correctness, testing, authorship cohesiveness, ghost code, and more. Optionally ingests tmux session logs for process evidence and interrogates agents about specific problems found. Use when asked to "audit", "grade", "evaluate", "review code quality", "rate this project", "score the agents", or "assess the codebase". Especially useful after Marcus multi-agent experiments to grade agent output and track quality over time.

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 synthetic code context for LLM coding tasks. Automatically use this before making code changes, fixing bugs, refactoring, or answering questions about the codebase. Provides execution paths, relevant files, symbols, tests, and code snippets.

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。

Diagnose a dygo Business App that does not validate, boot, route, render, authorize, migrate, or execute background work correctly. Use for evidence-first investigation rather than feature implementation.

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 or review dygo Record lifecycle Hooks in Business Apps or the Hook runtime. Use for validation, transactional Record reactions, and lifecycle side effects tied to Record 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。

Select, write, or review proportionate tests and verification for dygo Go packages, PostgreSQL behavior, metadata, CLI contracts, Studio, integrations, and releases. Use when test scope or confidence strategy is the main decision.

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 explicitly requested, unusually strict dygo maintainability audit that seeks structural simplification, removes accidental complexity, and challenges weak abstractions without changing behavior.

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。

Build or review dygo durable Jobs, Job Executions, queues, workers, retries, idempotency, and Schedules. Use for background or recurring business work.

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 Agent Skill design quality against official specifications and best practices. Use when reviewing, auditing, or improving SKILL.md files and skill packages. Provides multi-dimensional scoring and actionable improvement suggestions.

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。

Turn a product idea into a repeatable manual process you can start delivering today. Use to design manual-first products before writing any 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。