256 个 · 按相关度排序
Translate technical analysis into business language. Use when explaining statistical concepts to non-analysts, simplifying technical findings, or bridging communication between data teams and business stakeholders.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Restructure or clean up code with no behavior change, proved by before-and-after checks. Use when: asked to clean up, extract, dedupe or simplify, even one function.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Close out a change without the deep review loop: stage, simplify code and docs, run the project's checks, smoke test, update the changelog, self-improve, and ship. Use when the user asks to "quick finalize", "quickly finalize", "finalize quickly", "light finalize", "wrap this up quickly", "close this out without the full review", or "ship this without the deep pass".
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Re-explain the previous assistant message, or any text typed after the command, in a much simpler way. For when a reply made you go 'bro what'. Use /bro for a plain-language version of the last answer, or /bro <text> to simplify a pasted paragraph, error, email, or doc.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Shrink a Robonix change before review without changing behaviour. Use when a feature works and tests pass, before opening or updating a PR, and when a review asks for a smaller change.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Reduction pass — cuts content, structure, visuals, and dead code that doesn't answer a user question or drive an action, respecting CRAFT_LEVEL. Use when the UI feels cluttered, has too many CTAs, walls of text, or decorative noise, or when the user says "simplify this" / "it feels too busy". Invoke when the user asks for distill on their UI, or mentions 'distill' alongside design / UI / frontend work.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Geospatial vector analysis extending pandas. Read/write spatial formats (Shapefile, GeoJSON, GeoPackage, Parquet, PostGIS), CRS handling, geometric ops (buffer, simplify, centroid, affine), spatial analysis (joins, overlays, dissolve, clipping, distance), visualization (choropleth, interactive maps, basemaps). Use for spatial joins, overlays, CRS transforms, area/distance, maps.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Restructure existing code without changing its behavior, through a test-gated refactoring loop: a named target, a green suite over that target before any edit, a planned sequence of small named refactorings, and the full suite re-run after every step. Use when the user wants to refactor, restructure, clean up, simplify, or improve the design of existing code, or to apply refactoring recommendations from a code-review or architectural-analysis report. This skill changes code; it does not review code (use code-review), assess architecture (use architectural-analysis), plan a multi-module restructure before executing it (use plan-a-change), map domain boundaries before restructuring along them (use ddd-analysis), or build new behavior test-first (use tdd). Do not use it on code inside an active tdd loop; the refactor step of tdd owns that cleanup. Runs its planned sequence to completion without pausing for review; to review each named refactoring as it lands, use pairing.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Before removing code that looks redundant, wasteful, or "wrong" based on log observations or code review instinct, grep the test suite for tests whose names describe the exact behavior you're about to remove. A test whose title literally describes the "weird" thing (e.g. "calls play() even when player reports playing", "retries even when first call succeeded", "skips cache even when fresh") is a load-bearing workaround, and the production log you're reacting to is probably the workaround working as designed — not a bug. Use when: (1) Tempted to remove a function call that "looks redundant" based on a production log, (2) About to "simplify" a conditional that seems to always take the same branch, (3) Reviewing code and thinking "why would anyone write this?", (4) A log line shows a state that seems impossible or contradictory (e.g. playing=true but positionMs=0 for seconds), (5) CI surfaces a failing test whose name describes exactly what your fix removed.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Suggest and apply code refactorings to improve readability, maintainability, and code quality. Use this skill when improving existing code structure, eliminating code smells, applying design patterns, simplifying complex logic, extracting duplicated code, renaming for clarity, or preparing code for new features. Provides specific before/after examples, explains benefits, identifies risks, and ensures behavior preservation through tests.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Sequential 3-lens cleanup of recent code changes.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use when an agent is asked to draft, rewrite, edit, review, polish, copyedit, simplify, humanize, or create written prose, including creative writing, essays, posts, scripts, speeches, emails, documentation, product copy, and other style-sensitive text. Apply George Orwell's six rules and ASD-STE100 Simplified Technical English as a plain-English discipline while preserving the user's intended meaning, audience, tone, and explicit constraints.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Lint and typecheck debt paydown: clear pre-existing repo-wide lint/type violations and suppressions (@ts-ignore, # type: ignore) one rule per wave, fixing causes not symptoms. Runs on green main. For diff-scoped quality use absolute-simplify. Triggers on "absolute debt", "fix our lint warnings", "clear the type errors", "get to strict mode", "burn down suppressions".
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Dead code and dependency cleanup, repo-wide: unused deps, unreferenced exports, unreachable code, orphaned files — removed only with tool evidence, in reversible waves. Runs on green main. For diff-scoped cleanup use absolute-simplify. Triggers on "absolute prune", "remove dead code", "find unused deps/exports", "what can we delete", "clean up orphaned files".
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Restructure existing code safely without changing externally observable behavior. Composes context, design, architecture, code quality, and testing guardrails into a characterization-first refactoring workflow. Use when the user says 'refactor this', 'clean this up', 'untangle this module', 'move this to the right layer', 'simplify this code', or 'improve this structure'.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Refactor changed code to reduce duplication, complexity, and wasted work. Use for diffs, commit ranges, PRs, paths, staged changes, or working-tree changes.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Makes working code easier to read and change without altering what it does, and proves the behaviour stayed the same. Use when someone says "simplify this", "clean up this function", "this file is a mess", "reduce the complexity", "refactor for readability", "tidy my diff before the PR", or when a linter reports high cyclomatic complexity or deep nesting. Covers pinning current behaviour with characterization tests, measuring complexity, choosing a named refactoring, applying it in small verified steps, and reporting suspected bugs found on the way instead of fixing them silently.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
World-class explainer video expertise combining the visual storytelling of Kurzgesagt, the simplification genius of Common Craft, and the conversion science of high-performing SaaS landing pages. Explainer videos transform complex ideas into clear, compelling stories. Great explainers don't just inform—they illuminate. They take abstract concepts and make them feel obvious. The best explainer videos understand that simplicity is the ultimate sophistication, that showing beats telling, and that the goal isn't to impress with complexity—it's to make the viewer feel smart. Use when "explainer, explainer video, how it works, product demo, onboarding video, training video, educational video, whiteboard, animated explainer, explain this, simplify, concept video, SaaS video, explainer, video, animation, educational, product, demo, onboarding, SaaS" mentioned.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
亚马逊管理之道 (亚马逊管理之道 (The Amazon Way — Amazon 自身的领导力与运营操作系统) — 这个 master skill 蒸馏的不是『在亚马逊平台上开店卖货』(那是跨境电商运营,已由 cross-border-ecommerce 另蒸),也不是 AWS 云技术架构;而是亚马逊这家公司『怎么运营自己、怎么做决策、怎么招人、怎么创新、怎么规划』的一整套可迁移的管理机制(mechanisms)与心智操作系统。面向想在自己团队/公司引入亚马逊式机制的创始人/CEO/高管/运营负责人(COO)、产品经理与技术产品经理(PM/PMT)、组织与流程设计者(chief of staff / ops)、以及在亚马逊工作或准备面试亚马逊(著名的 LP 行为面试 + Bar Raiser)的人。覆盖: (a) 第一性张力 — 亚马逊 OS 的核心世界观分歧: **机制 > 良好意图(Good intentions don't work, mechanisms do:问题不能靠『下次更努力』修复,要装一个带检查闭环的自我强化流程) ⇄ 可控输入指标 vs 滞后输出指标(管你能控制的 input 如选品/价格/在库/配送速度,而非 revenue/股价这类滞后又不可控的 output) ⇄ 长期主义 vs 季度业绩(Day 1、willing to be misunderstood、用现金流+飞轮长期投入,宁可牺牲短期利润) ⇄ 客户执念 vs 竞争对手执念(working backwards 从客户倒推,而非从竞品或『我们能造什么』正推) ⇄ 叙事备忘录 vs PPT(6-pager + 开会前静默阅读、动手前先写 PR/FAQ;写作逼出清晰思考,禁 PowerPoint) ⇄ 单线程负责人/两个披萨团队 vs 协调税(separable、autonomous、one owner per initiative,砍掉跨团队依赖) ⇄ 高标准可学习可传递 vs 与生俱来(insist on the highest standards + Bar Raiser 招聘门,标准是 domain-specific 且能教的) ⇄ 节俭催生创造力 vs 血汗文化(frugality/约束驱动发明 —— 但 frugality + 高压 bar + URA 强制淘汰 = 文化阴暗面批判) ⇄ 两类决策(Type 1 不可逆/单向门 慎重 vs Type 2 可逆/双向门 高判断力个人快速决策,别用重流程拖慢))**; (b) 核心机制(mechanisms,本行的『工具栈』其实是一套运营机制而非软件) — Leadership Principles(14 条→2021 增至 16 条,是一套运营语言和决策仲裁器)、Working Backwards(从客户倒推:动手前先写新闻稿+常见问答 PR/FAQ)、叙事备忘录(6-pager narrative / 1-pager + silent reading 静默阅读、禁 PPT)、Weekly Business Review(WBR + metrics deck 指标看板)、input/output metrics(可控输入指标体系、DMAIC 式指标选择)、年度规划(OP1/OP2 + S-Team goals)、Bar Raiser(招聘机制,独立于用人经理的抬杠者拥有一票否决)、Two-Pizza Team / Single-Threaded Leader STL / separable teams、Correction of Errors(COE 事故复盘 + 5 Whys 五问法)、Andon Cord(安灯绳,借自丰田,一线可拉停)、Flywheel(飞轮:低价→更多客户→更多卖家→更多选品→更低成本结构→更低价)、Type 1/Type 2(单向门/双向门决策分级)、Regret Minimization Framework(遗憾最小化,贝索斯创业决策法); (c) 心智模型层 — customer obsession(客户执念是所有 LP 之首)、long-term thinking / Day 1(第二天就是停滞衰亡)、invent and simplify、ownership(主人翁,不说 that's not my job)、bias for action(可逆决策就快,speed matters)、disagree and commit(充分反对后即便不同意也全力执行)、frugality、dive deep(深入细节、不靠代理指标脱离一线)、think big、are right a lot(用强判断力和证伪自己的能力多做对的判断)、earn trust、deliver results; (d) 工作流/SOP — 用亚马逊方式发起一个新产品/业务(先写 PR/FAQ→评审→倒推着造)、如何跑一场 WBR、如何写和评审一份 6-pager(叙事流程 + 静默阅读)、Bar Raiser 招聘 loop、年度规划(OP1/OP2→S-Team goals→输入指标追踪)、事故后的 Correction of Errors; (e) 知识正典(en-primary,极其丰富且可取一手) — 贝索斯致股东信 1997-2021(1997 首封是奠基文本,每年附在信末;Day 1、遗憾最小化、long term)、《Working Backwards》Colin Bryar & Bill Carr(2021,运营机制圣经)、《The Everything Store》Brad Stone(2013,公司史)、《Amazon Unbound》Brad Stone(2021,权力与阴暗面续作)、《Invent and Wander》贝索斯文集(2020)、《The Amazon Way》/《Think Like Amazon》John Rossman(前亚马逊高管)、Amazon 官方 Leadership Principles 页(amazon.jobs,一手)、HBR『The Institutional Yes』(2007 贝索斯访谈); (f) 行业大佬/figures — Jeff Bezos(创始人,源头教义)、Andy Jassy(现任 CEO,OS 超越创始人的证据 + AWS 缔造者)、Colin Bryar(前贝索斯影子/TPM,《Working Backwards》作者)、Bill Carr(前数字媒体 VP,《Working Backwards》作者)、Jeff Wilke(前全球消费者 CEO,运营架构师)、John Rossman(前亚马逊、机制布道者/顾问)、Brad Stone(记者/编年史作者,批判性外部视角); (g) 争议/批判(必须保留,不能洗白) — 文化阴暗面(NYT 2015『Inside Amazon: Wrestling Big Ideas in a Bruising Workplace』揭露高压职场)、仓储与一线劳工争议、URA(unregretted attrition 强制淘汰)与 stack-ranking 的残酷、frugality + 高 bar = 燃尽(burnout);机制能否迁出亚马逊(cargo-culting:在初创或非科技公司照搬 PR/FAQ/输入指标/Bar Raiser 常失败);是贝索斯个人天才(personality)还是制度化机制(institution)—— OS 在贝索斯卸任后于 Jassy 治下延续,是机制派的证据; (h) 流派/思想谱系 — **信徒/机制布道派(Bryar & Carr《Working Backwards》+ 前亚马逊 operator 顾问圈,信 mechanisms 可移植、任何公司可安装)** vs **批判派(Brad Stone《Amazon Unbound》+ NYT + 劳工视角,认为 OS 与高淘汰的残酷机器不可分割,不该被浪漫化)** vs **情境/规模怀疑派(机制之所以有效是因为亚马逊特定的规模/现金流/创始人权力,照搬到小公司=cargo cult)** vs **创始人中心 vs 制度中心之争(是贝索斯个人 vs 可传承的机制)**。不含: 在亚马逊开店卖货/选品/PPC/FBA 的卖家运营(=cross-border-ecommerce)、AWS 云技术架构与运维、通用 MBA 管理理论泛泛而谈、把普通商业常识包装成『亚马逊独家秘诀』。) Master OS — automated mastery of 亚马逊管理之道 (The Amazon Way — Amazon 自身的领导力与运营操作系统) — 这个 master skill 蒸馏的不是『在亚马逊平台上开店卖货』(那是跨境电商运营,已由 cross-border-ecommerce 另蒸),也不是 AWS 云技术架构;而是亚马逊这家公司『怎么运营自己、怎么做决策、怎么招人、怎么创新、怎么规划』的一整套可迁移的管理机制(mechanisms)与心智操作系统。面向想在自己团队/公司引入亚马逊式机制的创始人/CEO/高管/运营负责人(COO)、产品经理与技术产品经理(PM/PMT)、组织与流程设计者(chief of staff / ops)、以及在亚马逊工作或准备面试亚马逊(著名的 LP 行为面试 + Bar Raiser)的人。覆盖: (a) 第一性张力 — 亚马逊 OS 的核心世界观分歧: **机制 >
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Applies the product philosophy and leadership frameworks of Steve Jobs, co-founder and CEO of Apple Inc. Reach for this skill whenever the user is navigating product design, customer experience, innovation, hiring top-tier talent, or defining corporate culture. Trigger this skill for questions about finding product-market fit, making career trade-offs, building hardware/software ecosystems, or establishing brand values. Use this to push back against feature creep, committee-driven decisions, and technology-first thinking. Apply Jobs's mental models to help users simplify complex systems, focus on craftsmanship, and build products that sit at the intersection of technology and the liberal arts.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Write and edit Brazilian Portuguese prose with natural rhythm and the author's voice while preserving facts, meaning, and intent. Use for PT-BR requests to humanizar, tirar cara de IA, remover AI slop, reescrever com voz, simplify language, or write a post, email, article, or bio. Also use the author's notes or transcripts and ask targeted questions when essential facts are missing. For English text, use the bundled human-ai skill.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Find, rank, and safely remove accidental codebase complexity by proving real consumers, dynamic entrypoints, compatibility obligations, duplicate representations, speculative surfaces, and lifecycle ownership. Use when asked to simplify or clean up a repository, reclaim code entropy, reduce over-engineering or redundancy, find deletion candidates, collapse duplicate state/APIs, remove dead or added-then-abandoned code beyond static-tool output, or implement an evidence-backed simplification pass in any language or stack. Also trigger for 代码化简、熵回收、删代码、清理冗余、收敛抽象、去除过度设计. Do not use as a performance audit unless simplification is the stated goal.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Rewrite and check technical writing to follow Simplified Technical English (ASD-STE100). Use when asked to simplify docs, rewrite in STE / plain technical English, write clear procedures or warnings, or flag hard-to-read or ambiguous technical text for a global / non-native audience.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Reviews an existing codebase for structural friction, unclear ownership, leaky or shallow interfaces, excessive coupling, misplaced state, poor testability, and risky dependency direction, then prioritizes evidence-backed improvement candidates. Use for architecture audits, modularization, modernization, or recurring cross-cutting change pain. Not for designing one new interface, simplifying a local function, or fixing a reproduced bug.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。