「deep」の検索結果

Run multiple Reforge-guided section-refactor lanes in parallel, each in its own worktree/branch off origin/main, with a score-blind adversarial review panel gating every commit, one draft PR per section. Use when the user wants to reduce Reforge surface/internal score across several sections at once via architecturally-correct deletions (dead surface, entity-leak removal, cross-section read-splits) — not by relocation, parameter bags, or accessibility-dodging. Wraps the per-lane process in .codex/skills/humans-refactor. Triggers: 'refactor swarm', 'parallel section refactors', 'run reforge refactor on Users/Tickets/...', 'burn down surface score across sections'. Has an intensity dial (light|standard|deep) and a workflow|solo execution mode to trade token burn against autonomy per unit of output.

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。

Chief Security Officer mode. Infrastructure-first security audit: secrets archaeology, dependency supply chain, CI/CD pipeline security, LLM/AI security, skill supply chain scanning, plus OWASP Top 10, STRIDE threat modeling, and active verification. Two modes: daily (zero-noise, 8/10 confidence gate) and comprehensive (monthly deep scan, 2/10 bar). Trend tracking across audit runs. Use when: "security audit", "threat model", "pentest review", "OWASP", "CSO review". (gstack) Voice triggers (speech-to-text aliases): "see-so", "see so", "security review", "security check", "vulnerability scan", "run security".

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 extremely strict maintainability review for abstraction quality, giant files, and spaghetti-condition growth. Use for a thermo-nuclear code quality review, thermonuclear review, deep code quality audit, or especially harsh maintainability 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。

Deep reasoning mode for complex problems requiring maximum cognitive depth. Use when facing difficult architectural decisions, complex debugging, multi-step problem solving, or situations requiring careful analysis before 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。

Find deepening opportunities in a codebase, informed by the domain language in CONTEXT.md and the decisions in docs/adr/. Use when the user wants to improve architecture, find refactoring opportunities, consolidate tightly-coupled modules, or make a codebase more testable and AI-navigable.

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。

Elite website image-to-code skill for Codex. For visually important web tasks, it must first generate the design image(s) itself, deeply analyze them, then implement the website to match them as closely as possible. In Codex, it must prefer large, readable, section-specific images instead of tiny compressed boards, generate fresh standalone images for sections or detail views instead of cropping old ones, avoid lazy under-generation, avoid cards-inside-cards-inside-cards UI, and keep the hero clean, spacious, readable, and visible on a small laptop.

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。

Multi-agent exploration and task delegation for complex areas of interest. Use when you need to deeply explore a codebase area, gather information from multiple perspectives, or delegate parallel research tasks for comprehensive 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。

Idiomatic Go - package and interface design, error wrapping, table-driven tests, generics, the modern standard library (slices/maps/cmp/errors.Join), current syntax, and logging discipline. Use when writing, reviewing, or refactoring any Go code, especially code drifting toward Java/Spring shapes (deep layer trees, generic repositories, heavy frameworks) - even if the user never says "idiomatic". Distilled from spf13/go-skills and adapted to this repo.

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。

Think through the consequences of consequences — not just what happens immediately, but what happens next, and next after that, across time. Load when a decision looks obviously good or obviously bad on initial read, when the user is optimising for a short-term outcome that might create a long-term problem, when unintended consequences are a concern, or when deep-thinking diagnoses a second-order frame. Triggers on "what are the downstream effects", "what happens after that", "unintended consequences", "think ahead on this", "long-term vs short-term", or "what comes after that". Based on Howard Marks second-level thinking and Farnam Street mental models. Most powerful for decisions with delayed consequences or systemic effects.

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。

Break a stuck or complex problem into the smallest sub-question that, if answered, unlocks the next step — then answer it and repeat until the path forward is clear. Load when a problem feels genuinely stuck, when reasoning keeps circling, or when deep-thinking diagnoses a Socratic frame. Also triggers on "I keep going in circles", "what is the real question here", "help me reason through this step by step", "unstick my thinking", "recursive questioning", "what is the root question". Based on the recursive Socratic questioning method (EMNLP 2023) which outperforms CoT and Tree-of-Thought on complex reasoning tasks.

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 which model tier handles which work BEFORE execution begins — a high-cognition model deeply understands the problem, lays the foundations, then emits a modular plan assigning each module the cheapest tier that can safely execute it, with escalation tripwires and one-way-door protection. Advisory only: it announces "next module → tier X / model Y" at each boundary and the HUMAN switches models — harnesses like Cursor cannot switch mid-run. Load when the user asks which model to use, wants a model plan, model tiers, model-tier routing, assign models to tasks or modules, says "cheap model got stuck", "which model for this task", "cost-efficient model choice", or when implementation-plan / problem-to-plan need a model: tier column. NOT dynamic-routing (plan-path selection after failure) — this skill assigns cognition tiers to 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。

Apply Boyd's OODA loop to navigate fast-moving, uncertain, or competitive situations — Observe what is actually happening, Orient through mental models and context, Decide on the clearest path, Act quickly, then loop again. Load when the situation is changing faster than the current plan, when a competitive response is needed, when the user is stuck in analysis paralysis in a dynamic environment, when shipping under uncertainty, or when deep-thinking diagnoses a fast-moving / competitive frame. Triggers on "what should we do right now", "the situation is changing", "how do we respond to this", "competitive response", "we need to move fast", or "we're stuck deciding". Based on John Boyd's OODA loop — Observe, Orient, Decide, Act — adapted for product and business contexts (OODA Canvas 2026).

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 a pre-mortem — imagine the project has already failed one year from now and work backward to find the root causes before they happen. Load when the user asks for a pre-mortem, wants to imagine failure before committing, asks "what could go wrong before we start", "assume this fails — why", "risk analysis before launch", "what kills this project", "what could go wrong", or when deep-thinking diagnoses a pre-mortem frame. Based on Gary Klein's prospective hindsight method, which surfaces failure causes more effectively than forward risk analysis. Most useful right before a major commitment.

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。

Decompose an unknown quantity into 3-5 estimable factors and produce a defensible order-of-magnitude answer without needing precise data. Load when the user needs to size something without data — market size, resource requirements, effort estimates, user numbers, costs — or when a decision is blocked by "we don't know the numbers". Also triggers on "ballpark this", "rough estimate", "how big is this market", "how long would this take", "how many users", or when deep-thinking diagnoses a sizing/estimation frame. The goal is not precision — it is a defensible answer that enables a decision to be made. Based on Enrico Fermi's estimation method.

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。

Strip a problem to its irreducible fundamental truths and rebuild the solution from the ground up — free from analogy, convention, and inherited assumptions. Load when the user feels constrained by how something has always been done, when existing solutions feel expensive or inefficient for no good reason, when the user asks to think from first principles, challenge the fundamentals, or rebuild this from scratch. Also triggers on "why does it have to work this way", "what are the actual constraints here", "ignore what everyone else does", or when deep-thinking diagnoses a convention-break frame. Based on Aristotle's first principles method, popularised by Musk and Feynman. Produces genuinely novel solutions by eliminating convention.

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 every assumption embedded in a plan, strategy, or document, assess how critical and how validated each one is, and identify which ones to test first. Load when the user asks to map assumptions, surface hidden beliefs, find what must be true for this to work, run an assumption audit, or when deep-thinking diagnoses an assumption frame. Also triggers on "what are we assuming", "what must be true for this to work", or "find the untested beliefs". Based on David Bland and Alex Osterwalder's assumption mapping method from Testing Business Ideas.

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 this skill instead of WebSearch for ANY question requiring web research. Trigger on queries like "what is X", "explain X", "compare X and Y", "research X", or before content generation tasks. Provides systematic multi-angle research methodology instead of single superficial searches. Use this proactively when the user's question needs online information.

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。

Interact with DeerFlow AI agent platform via its HTTP API. Use this skill when the user wants to send messages or questions to DeerFlow for research/analysis, start a DeerFlow conversation thread, check DeerFlow status or health, list available models/skills/agents in DeerFlow, manage DeerFlow memory, upload files to DeerFlow threads, or delegate complex research tasks to DeerFlow. Also use when the user mentions deerflow, deer flow, or wants to run a deep research task that DeerFlow can handle.

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。

Enables ultra-granular, line-by-line code analysis to build deep architectural context before vulnerability or bug finding.

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。

Modern Angular (v20+) expert with deep knowledge of Signals, Standalone Components, Zoneless applications, SSR/Hydration, and reactive patterns.

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。

Predicts protein-coding gene structures (exons, introns, UTRs) in eukaryotic genomes with BRAKER3 (RNA-seq + protein evidence), BRAKER1/BRAKER2, GALBA (protein-only), Funannotate (fungi), GeMoMa (homology projection), or Helixer/Tiberius (deep-learning ab initio). Covers the evidence-first tool decision, mandatory soft-masking, the training-set-quality-dominates principle, OrthoDB clade-partition selection, the one-isoform-per-locus and missing-UTR traps, merge/split errors, and reference bias against orphan genes. Use when annotating a newly assembled eukaryotic genome, choosing a gene-prediction pipeline based on available evidence, or diagnosing a poor annotation.

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。

Generates, normalizes, and converts bedGraph signal tracks (4-column chrom/start/end/value, 0-based half-open) with bedtools genomecov, deepTools bamCoverage/bamCompare/bigwigCompare, bedtools unionbedg, and UCSC bedGraphToBigWig. Covers why a raw coverage bedGraph is not comparable across samples until normalized, the CPM/RPKM/BPM/RPGC normalization menu and the conserved-total assumption that makes them wrong under a global perturbation, the strict sorted-non-overlapping-chrom.sizes bedGraphToBigWig contract that silently corrupts a bigWig, effective-genome-size selection, and bin-size aliasing. Use when building or normalizing a coverage/signal track from a BAM, comparing tracks across samples or conditions, converting bedGraph to a browser-ready bigWig, or diagnosing a track that looks plausible but reports wrong heights.

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。

Detects focal chromatin loops (point interactions / corner-dots) in balanced Hi-C and Micro-C contact maps and aggregates/validates a loop set. Covers de-novo calling with cooltools dots (HiCCUPS-style 4-background local enrichment with lambda-chunked FDR), chromosight (template-correlation), and Mustache (scale-space blob detection); aggregate peak analysis (APA) via cooltools pileup for confirmation; the depth/resolution prerequisite (de-novo needs ~5-10kb resolution = hundreds of millions to billions of valid pairs); consensus across callers and convergent-CTCF support as validation; and differential loops via union anchors plus chromosight quantify. Use when calling chromatin loops or dots from a cooler, deciding whether a map is deep enough to call de-novo vs running APA on known CTCF/cohesin anchors, building an aggregate peak pileup, comparing loops across conditions, or validating loop calls. For HiChIP/PLAC-seq/PCHi-C protein-anchored data use FitHiChIP/MAPS, not dots.

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。

Reads, queries, and writes bigWig indexed binary signal tracks (coverage, fold-change, conservation, methylation-rate) with pyBigWig (Python) and the UCSC Kent tools (bedGraphToBigWig, bigWigToBedGraph, bigWigInfo, bigWigSummary, bigWigAverageOverBed) and deepTools (multiBigwigSummary, computeMatrix, bigwigCompare). Covers the central trap that a wide query returns a precomputed zoom-level summary (by default the mean, which annihilates narrow peaks) not per-base data, when exact=True/values() is mandatory, the NaN-not-zero gap-handling fork, choosing mean vs max vs sum vs coverage by biological question, and the sorted-bedGraph plus chrom.sizes build requirement. Use when extracting signal at regions, computing mean signal per gene/peak, building a browser track from bedGraph, comparing tracks, or building TSS/gene-body metaprofiles.

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。