「decision」の検索結果

Use trace-mcp through bb to search indexed code and recall project decisions with compact context.

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 the konsistent CLI, review all reported violations, and fix them in the codebase. Use when the user wants to "fix konsistent violations", "resolve konsistent errors", "clean up konsistent diagnostics", "make konsistent pass", "address structural convention violations", or asks to run konsistent and act on the results. The skill is interactive: it requires explicit user decisions when many violations stem from the same rule (rule vs. code question), explicit user confirmation before modifying any code, and a triage step for non-trivial violations. For editing `konsistent.json`, this skill defers to the `konsistent-config` 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。

PM skill for Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, and Windsurf. Diagnoses SaaS metrics, critiques PRDs, plans roadmaps, runs discovery, coaches PM career transitions, pressure-tests AI product decisions, and designs PLG growth strategies. Seven knowledge domains, 12 templates, 40+ frameworks, and an opinionated interaction style that labels assumptions and names tradeoffs.

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 decision you can't fully answer into a questionnaire for someone else to fill in.

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。

Grill the user relentlessly about a plan, decision, or idea. Use when the user wants to stress-test their thinking, or uses any 'grill' trigger phrases.

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。

Orchestrate approved, bounded work through a same-directory Codex App fork: create and name the execution task, ask it to run spec-executor, route decisions through Codex Task Messenger, validate the returned receipt, and archive a completed child. The source may come from any planning workflow. Requires Codex App task tools and codex-task-messenger.

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。

Convene a roundtable of sub-agents that debate a decision or proposal from opposing perspectives — parallel independent statements, anonymous cross-review, then a chaired verdict reporting consensus and dissent.

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。

Plan a huge chunk of work (more than one agent session can hold) as a shared map of decision tickets on your issue tracker, and resolve them one at a time until the way to the destination is clear.

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。

Analyze escaped defects and test suite health through blameless postmortems. Covers bug pattern analysis, test suite health reviews, 5 Whys root cause analysis, process improvement cycles, and postmortem/retro meeting templates with action item tracking. Use when: "QA retro," "escaped bugs," "postmortem," "quality incident," "defect analysis," "improvement cycle." Not for: live release go/no-go decisions — use release-readiness. Not for ongoing metric dashboards — use qa-metrics. Not for reviewing existing test code quality — use ai-qa-review. Related: qa-metrics, test-reliability, test-strategy.

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。

End-to-end testing of email-dependent flows — signup confirmation, password reset, magic-link login, OTP/MFA codes, and notification emails. Covers the capture-inbox decision tree (Mailpit, Mailosaur, MailSlurp, Ethereal), Playwright polling without fixed sleeps, regex extraction of links/OTPs from the email body, deterministic per-test addresses (plus-addressing, per-inbox), subject/from/header/link assertions, and SPF/DKIM/DMARC deliverability checks as a separate suite. Use when: "test the signup confirmation email," "password reset email test," "magic-link login test," "capture OTP from email," "Mailpit," "Mailosaur," "MailSlurp," "email arrives flaky in CI," "assert email subject/from/links." Not for: Sending transactional email from your app code, or API-only contract tests of an email provider — those are api-testing / app concerns. Email HTML rendering across clients (Outlook/Gmail dark mode) is out of scope (note it as a gap; use visual-testing or Litmus). Related: playwright-automation, api-testing, test-data-management, qa-project-context.

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 a single sprint or release test plan. Covers feature decomposition into testable scenarios, requirements-to-test coverage mapping, effort estimation by test type, prioritization matrices (risk × effort), resource allocation, and scheduling with buffers. Use when: "sprint test plan," "release test plan," "what to test this sprint," "test estimation," "coverage mapping." Not for: multi-quarter strategy — use `test-strategy`. Not for: ranking areas by risk — use `risk-based-testing`. Not for: the go/no-go decision itself — use `release-readiness`. Related: test-strategy, risk-based-testing, release-readiness.

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 CI/CD pipelines that run test suites. Covers GitHub Actions and GitLab CI templates, parallelism and sharding, artifact management, flaky-test quarantine, test-result publishing, coverage quality gates, OIDC keyless deploy, and copy-paste workflows for Playwright, Jest, and multi-stage pipelines. Use when: "CI/CD," "GitHub Actions," "pipeline," "test in CI," "GitLab CI," "continuous integration," "test automation pipeline," "shard tests in CI." Not for: per-test flaky healing at runtime — use test-reliability; go/no-go release decisions and smoke-test checklists — use release-readiness; test-result dashboards and trend reporting — use qa-metrics. Related: playwright-automation, qa-metrics, test-reliability, coverage-analysis, release-readiness.

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。

Decision framework for isolating every external dependency in a test suite: when to use in-process mocks, HTTP stubs (MSW, WireMock), record-replay, fault injection (Toxiproxy), or ephemeral real services (Testcontainers), and how to enforce that no real calls escape in CI. Use when: "mock service," "stub API," "fake service," "WireMock," "MSW," "Toxiproxy," "test isolation," "dependency management," "stub an external API in CI." Not for: consumer-driven contract verification (Pact, broker) — use contract-testing; standing up a full Docker Compose env or seed data — use test-environments; broad resilience/game-day fault campaigns — use chaos-engineering. Related: contract-testing, test-environments, api-testing, test-data-management, chaos-engineering.

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。

Validate release readiness with evidence-based go/no-go decisions. Covers go/no-go checklists, smoke test suite design, staged rollout validation, rollback criteria and procedures, and post-deployment verification. Ensures release confidence comes from data, not feelings. Use when: "release ready," "go/no-go," "smoke test," "release checklist," "rollback plan," "staged rollout," "canary deploy." Not for: safe-release techniques (flags, canary, dark launch) applied during the rollout itself — use testing-in-production; scheduled probes that run continuously after release — use synthetic-monitoring; designing new tests from prod telemetry — use observability-driven-testing. Related: testing-in-production, qa-metrics, ci-cd-integration, ai-system-testing.

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 a whole regression suite and prune/restructure it with evidence: per-test coverage fingerprinting, AST near-duplicate clustering, CI-history mining for never-failing and flaky tests, prune decision rules (redundant/obsolete/low-value/keep), smoke/core/extended tiering by risk and defect-detection history, and a defensible "what we deleted and why" record. Deletion is destructive — quarantine and human sign-off are mandatory. Use when: "audit the test suite," "prune redundant tests," "find duplicate tests," "which tests can we delete," "restructure into smoke/core/extended," "is this test pulling its weight," "shrink the regression suite." Not for: Judging whether an individual test is WELL-WRITTEN (smells, assertions) — that is ai-qa-review. Healing one flaky test at runtime — that is test-reliability. Bulk selector regeneration after a UI refactor — that is selector-drift-recovery. Related: ai-qa-review, coverage-analysis, test-reliability, risk-based-testing, qa-project-context.

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。

Atomic git commit with conventional message. Use when the user says "commit", "save my changes", "commit this", or wants to create a git commit. Stages specific files, writes a conventional commit message with body explaining non-obvious decisions. Never uses git add -A.

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。

Play Pokémon games via headless emulation. Start a game server, read game state, make strategic decisions, and send actions — all from the terminal.

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。

Logs AI thoughts and decisions for human observability. Applies continuously throughout all tasks to maintain transparency.

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 parallel exploration of multiple implementation approaches using git worktrees. Use when facing decisions with multiple valid paths. Triggers on: explore options, compare approaches, parallel exploration.

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。

Conducts deep technical research for Aha Loop stories. Use before implementing stories involving unfamiliar libraries or architectural decisions. Triggers on: research this, investigate, explore options, compare alternatives.

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。

Designs system architecture and selects technology stack based on vision analysis. Use after vision analysis for technical decisions. Triggers on: design architecture, select tech stack, choose framework.

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。

Document development environment requirements for team consistency and AI agent understanding during PRD v0.6 Architecture. Triggers on requests to define environment setup, document tooling, create dev setup guide, or when user asks "what tools do I need?", "environment setup", "dev environment", "CLI requirements", "project setup", "onboarding setup". Consumes TECH- (stack selections), ARC- (architecture decisions). Outputs ENV- entries for development, CI/CD, and infrastructure environments. Feeds v0.7 Build 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。

Surface risks through guided questioning, helping users consider pivots, constraints, and prioritization during PRD v0.5 Red Team Review. Triggers on requests to identify risks, stress-test the idea, perform red team review, or when user asks "what could go wrong?", "identify risks", "red team", "risk assessment", "challenge assumptions", "stress test the idea". Consumes all prior IDs (CFD-, BR-, FEA-, PER-, UJ-, SCR-) as interview context. Outputs RISK- entries with owner decisions and mitigations. Feeds v0.5 Technical Stack Selection.

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。

Symfony UX frontend stack -- decision tree and orchestrator for choosing between Stimulus, Turbo, TwigComponent, LiveComponent, UX Icons, and UX Map. Use when the user is unsure which tool fits, wants to combine multiple UX packages, or asks a general frontend architecture question in Symfony. Also trigger when the user asks "which UX package should I use", "how to make this interactive", "should I use Stimulus or LiveComponent", "how to structure my Symfony frontend", "what is the difference between Turbo and LiveComponent", "should this be a Frame or a LiveComponent", "how do these UX packages work together", "what is the Symfony way to do frontend". Do NOT trigger when the user clearly names a specific tool (stimulus, turbo, twig-component, live-component, ux-icons, ux-map) -- defer to the specialized skill 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。