「trade-offs」の検索結果

软件架构 (含 应用架构 / 系统架构 / 分布式 后端架构 / 前后端 数据流 与 数据模型 设计 / API 边界 / 可扩展性 / 演进式架构 — 不含 硬件架构 / 纯企业架构 / 纯 DevOps / 纯安全架构) (software architecture — application & system architecture for web / mobile / distributed back-ends; designing services + data models + data flow + integration boundaries; making explicit trade-offs about scalability / coupling / consistency / evolvability; not hardware / chip architecture, not pure enterprise-architecture (TOGAF/Zachman), not pure DevOps / SRE, not pure security architecture (those are adjacent disciplines).) Master OS — automated mastery of software architecture — application & system architecture for web / mobile / distributed back-ends; designing services + data models + data flow + integration boundaries; making explicit trade-offs about scalability / coupling / consistency / evolvability; not hardware / chip architecture, not pure enterprise-architecture (TOGAF/Zachman), not pure DevOps / SRE, not pure security architecture (those are adjacent disciplines).: top builders' mental models, tool stack, current workflows, jargon, and where to keep up. Trigger this skill when the user works on software architecture — application & system architecture for web / mobile / distributed back-ends; designing services + data models + data flow + integration boundaries; making explicit trade-offs about scalability / coupling / consistency / evolvability; not hardware / chip architecture, not pure enterprise-architecture (TOGAF/Zachman), not pure DevOps / SRE, not pure security architecture (those are adjacent disciplines). problems and wants industry-grade thinking, tool selection, or workflow guidance. 触发词：「软件架构」「系统设计」「system design」「应用架构」「service design」

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 evaluate architecture decisions, document trade-offs, and select appropriate patterns. This skill should be used when the user asks about 'architecture decision', 'ADR', 'design pattern selection', 'technology choice', or needs to evaluate architectural trade-offs. Keywords: architecture, ADR, patterns, trade-offs, technical debt, quality attributes, decision record.

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。

技術や設計を選んだ理由を、背景・比較案・影響とともにMarkdownへ記録するスキル。連番と索引で整理し、既存の記録から過去の判断理由も確認します。

• フレームワークやDBの選定理由の記録
• 設計の比較案と利点・欠点の整理
• 過去の技術判断の理由を調べたいとき

Present a design to a client so they can make a decision rather than react to a picture — the brief restated, the moves explained against it, the options with their trade-offs, and a specific decision requested. Use when asked to present a design to a client, prepare a design review meeting, present concept options, or when a client keeps changing their mind after sign-off. Produces the presentation structure, the brief-to-design traceability, the options with honest trade-offs, the cost and programme position, and the decision record that makes sign-off stick.

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 facing architectural decisions, complex trade-offs, strategic technology choices, or scaling and migration questions that deserve more than a quick answer. Lays out options with trade-offs, then a recommendation.

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 you need framework-agnostic MongoDB and non-relational database query guidance — document schema design, collection modeling, JSON Schema validation, indexes, aggregation pipelines, query performance, consistency trade-offs, transactions, and operational safety — without choosing Spring Boot, Quarkus, or Micronaut. This should trigger for requests such as Design MongoDB document schemas; Review MongoDB queries and indexes; Improve aggregation pipeline performance; Model non-relational data access patterns; Review NoSQL consistency and transaction trade-offs. Part of Plinth Toolkit

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。

System-design thinking before any doc or code: goals/non-goals, back-of-envelope numbers, components and contracts, failure modes, operability, security, trade-offs. Use for "design this system", "architecture for X", "trade-offs for X", "how should we architect", "API design", "data model for", "service boundaries", or before an ADR. Hands off to /ship:write-docs to record the decision. Not implementation planning (/ship:design — that turns a decided design into stories).

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 conjoint analysis to measure how product attributes drive consumer preferences and willingness to pay. Use this skill when the user needs to quantify feature value trade-offs, estimate willingness to pay for specific features, or optimize product configuration — even if they say 'which features do customers value most', 'willingness to pay for feature X', or 'product attribute trade-offs'.".

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 raw idea into ONE honest recommendation: interview one question at a time until the problem, requirements, goals, non-goals, and constraints are CONFIRMED, then deliver a single verdict — do, don't, cheaper alternatives, trade-offs, ordered checklist, success metrics. Required: the user wants exactly ONE recommendation — not options, not a debate — and their framing is open to challenge (advise may answer a different question than the one asked). Triggers on "what should I do about X", "advise me on X", "am I approaching this right", "is this the right move". Do NOT use to be interrogated with no recommendation (→ mk:grill) — advise also interviews one question at a time, but only to reach a verdict. Do NOT use when the framing is settled and only the options are open (→ mk:brainstorming). Do NOT use to decide whether something is worth building (→ mk:office-hours). Do NOT use when you want several perspectives to argue it out (→ mk:party).

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。

Technical research methodology with YAGNI/KISS/DRY principles. Phases: scope definition, information gathering, analysis, synthesis, recommendation. Capabilities: technology evaluation, architecture analysis, best practices research, trade-off assessment, solution design. Actions: research, analyze, evaluate, compare, recommend technical solutions. Keywords: research, technology evaluation, best practices, architecture analysis, trade-offs, scalability, security, maintainability, YAGNI, KISS, DRY, technical analysis, solution design, competitive analysis, feasibility study. Use when: researching technologies, evaluating architectures, analyzing best practices, comparing solutions, assessing technical trade-offs, planning scalable/secure systems.

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。

MAGI System v2 — AoT 分解 + MELCHIOR/BALTHASAR/CASPAR 合議 + gabriel adversarial probe による 構造化意思決定フレームワーク。判断ポイント 2+ / 影響レイヤー 3+ / 選択肢 3+ で使用。 Use when facing complex decisions with multiple trade-offs or architectural choices.

MAGI System v2 — AoT 分解 + MELCHIOR/BALTHASAR/CASPAR 合議 + lam-harness:gabriel adversarial probe による 構造化意思決定フレームワーク。判断ポイント 2+ / 影響レイヤー 3+ / 選択肢 3+ で使用。 Use when facing complex decisions with multiple trade-offs or architectural choices.

プロジェクトで使う業務用語や概念の境界を、具体例とコードの照合で明確にします。決まった定義を用語集に記録し、重要な設計判断の理由も必要に応じて残すスキルです。

• 曖昧な業務用語を整理したいとき
• GLOSSARY.mdの作成・更新
• 業務上の定義とコードの整合確認

画面デザインの方向性を比べるため、操作できるHTMLの試作を2〜3案作ります。レイアウトや情報量の違いを見比べ、各案の長所と弱点から採用案を検討します。

• 実装前に画面レイアウトを比較
• 情報量と余白の違いを試したいとき
• フィルターやパネル操作の試作

Structures a multi-perspective council exercise for decisions, research trade-offs, and creative challenges. Simulates thinking archetypes, separates evidence from assumptions and values, and synthesizes a conditional recommendation. Use when the user requests a council, panel, devil's advocate analysis, "mind council", or deliberate comparison of perspectives on a difficult choice.

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。

Create or evaluate an architecture decision record (ADR). Use when choosing between technologies (e.g., Kafka vs SQS), documenting a design decision with trade-offs and consequences, reviewing a system design proposal, or designing a new component from requirements and constraints.

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 adding, retiring, or auditing feature flags. Triggers on "add a flag", "ship behind a flag", "rollout plan", "kill switch", "stale flags", "flag debt", "LaunchDarkly", "GrowthBook", "Statsig", "Unleash", "Flipt", or any progressive-delivery question. Ships flag debt scanner, rollout planner, and kill-switch auditor (all stdlib Python), 4 references on flag taxonomy + provider trade-offs + rollout strategies + lifecycle, plus a /flag-cleanup slash command.

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 designing or revisiting product pricing — selecting a pricing model (subscription seat-based, usage-based, value-based, freemium, or hybrid), running Van Westendorp Price Sensitivity Meter analysis on WTP survey data, or designing Good/Better/Best packaging tiers. Recommends a model and a price range with trade-offs, never a single number. For Commercial leads, Product Marketing, and CMOs at the pricing-design moment — not deal-by-deal discounting, not brand positioning.

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。

Create a comprehensive product strategy using the 9-section Product Strategy Canvas — vision, segments, costs, value propositions, trade-offs, metrics, growth, capabilities, and defensibility. Use when building a product strategy, creating a strategic plan, or defining product direction.

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。

Google platform decision and setup guidance, loaded on demand from Google's skill catalog. Use when a developer is choosing or setting up part of their stack, such as where to run a service, a database, storage, messaging, authentication, analytics, ads, or AI model serving, and a Google product is a reasonable candidate - whether or not a vendor is named - or when a request names a Google product or API. Brings in the matching Google skill so the answer can weigh Google options, their trade-offs, and when they are not the right fit. Skip when the stack is already settled on another provider and no Google product is named, or the task involves no platform choice.

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 designing new high-level system architecture, reviewing existing designs, or making architectural decisions. Invoke to create architecture diagrams, write Architecture Decision Records (ADRs), evaluate technology trade-offs, design component interactions, and plan for scalability. Use for system design, architecture review, microservices structuring, ADR authoring, scalability planning, and infrastructure pattern selection — distinct from code-level design patterns or database-only design 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。

Builds and runs code under AddressSanitizer to catch buffer overflows, use-after-free, and other memory errors during fuzzing or tests. Covers -fsanitize=address builds, ASAN_OPTIONS, reading the crash report, LeakSanitizer, and the overhead and platform trade-offs. Use when fuzzing C/C++ or Rust that has unsafe blocks or FFI, when debugging a memory corruption crash, or when reading an ASan stack trace.

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。

Guide developers through capturing diagnostic artifacts to diagnose production .NET performance issues. Use when the user needs help choosing diagnostic tools, collecting performance data, or understanding tool trade-offs across different environments (Windows/Linux, .NET Framework/modern .NET, container/non-container).

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。

Present options with trade-offs for informed decision-making — use when choosing between approaches

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。