「prd」の検索結果

Produce a deterministic, read-only evidence map of the repository for SDD Composy (languages, manifests, commands, modules, boundaries, staleness) and publish the context bundle only on request. Use before a PRD or TechSpec, or when the map is stale — 'mapear o repositório', 'atualizar o contexto do código', 'what does this codebase look like for SDD'. Do NOT use for architecture decisions, code review, or repository exploration without an SDD workspace.

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 a product requirement, PRD, or executable roadmap is requested, or when an approved requirement needs decomposing into phases, epics, features and 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。

Write and refine high-quality user stories — INVEST criteria, "As a X, I want Y, so that Z" format, Gherkin acceptance criteria when applicable, definition of ready, anti-patterns, and a review checklist. Use when creating or reviewing user stories, PRD section 6, backlog items, or acceptance criteria. Do NOT use for technical specs, architecture decisions, or task decomposition.

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 plan, spec, or PRD into independently-grabbable issues on the project issue tracker using tracer-bullet vertical slices. Use when user wants to convert a plan into issues, create implementation tickets, or break down work into issues.

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。

Sets up an `## Agent skills` block in AGENTS.md/CLAUDE.md and `docs/agents/` so the engineering skills know this repo's issue tracker (GitHub or local markdown), triage label vocabulary, and domain doc layout. Run before first use of `to-issues`, `to-prd`, `triage`, `diagnose`, `tdd`, `improve-codebase-architecture`, or `zoom-out` — or if those skills appear to be missing context about the issue tracker, triage labels, or domain docs.

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 detailed, step-by-step implementation plan for a feature or project. Load when the user asks to plan a feature, create a technical roadmap, break down a PRD into tasks, design an implementation strategy, or sequence engineering work. Also triggers on "how should we build this", "implementation plan for", "technical breakdown", "task list for", or any request to turn a high-level requirement into a concrete execution plan. Supports phased rollouts, architecture-first, and MVP-focused planning.

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 a tailored AGENTS.md for any new project by interviewing the user about their skill gaps, project goals, and tech context. Load when the user asks to set up a project, initialize agents, create an AGENTS.md, bootstrap a repo, onboard agents to a codebase, or says "set up this project for agents". Also triggers on "write an AGENTS.md for this project", "configure agents for my repo", "project bootstrap", "agent onboarding", or when the user starts a new project and needs agent-ready configuration. Re-run when new context arrives (PRD written, stack changes, team changes) to update the AGENTS.md.

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。

Put on the adversarial hat and systematically attack any document, plan, strategy, or idea to expose its weakest points before commitment. Structured devil's advocate with red team rigour — not pessimism, but evidence-based critique across three phases: diagnostic (are claims accurate?), creative (is the problem artificially constrained?), challenge (are solutions robust?). Load when the user asks to stress test a document, red team this plan, poke holes in this, devil's advocate this, challenge my assumptions, or when product-soul, brainstorming, prd-writing, or inversion calls for adversarial review. Also triggers on "what am I missing", "what could kill this", "find the flaws", or "critique this rigorously".

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。

Set a deliberate visual direction before any UI is built — the single biggest lever against generic AI output. Derives a posture from product-soul/PRD/specs, scores a curated archetype palette, then generates 2-3 GENUINELY DISTINCT directions and compares them side-by-side before committing to one. Load when the user asks to pick an aesthetic, choose a design direction, decide what a UI should feel like, explore visual options, says "what should this look like", "make it feel like [Linear/Apple/ Duolingo]", "give me design directions", "explore some looks", or when frontend-design routes here. Replaces design-archetype. Sub-skill of frontend-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。

Orchestrator + builder for distinctive, production-grade frontends that don't look AI-generated. Derives stack and design context from product-soul/PRD/specs, then runs the anti-slop chain — explore distinct directions, lock a DESIGN.md system, build from golden examples with mandatory polish + every interactive/empty/loading/error state, then review. Load when the user asks to build a UI, design a frontend, build a landing page or dashboard or web app, beautify or redesign a page, make a UI look premium/playful/editorial, says "build me a frontend", "make this not look AI-generated", "design this interface", "give this real polish", or "frontend design". Routes to design-direction, design-system, design-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。

Turn Notion specs into implementation plans, tasks, and progress tracking; use when implementing PRDs/feature specs and creating Notion plans + tasks from them.

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。

Tests genotype-environment associations and identifies adaptive loci while correcting for the four-confound landscape (structure, demography, background selection, sampling design) using LFMM2 with mandatory K via sNMF cross-entropy elbow (LEA 3), BayPass Core/AUX/C2/IS with Omega covariance matrix, RDA / pRDA for polygenic adaptation (Forester 2018; requires imputed genotypes), OutFLANK with trimmed FST null, pcadapt, gradient forests (Ellis-Smith-Pitcher 2012, NOT mis-cited Ellis-Manel), Capblancq & Forester 2021 RDA Swiss-army-knife, genomic-offset prediction with Lind & Lotterhos 2025 three-regime caveat, Lotterhos-Whitlock sampling optima, Wang & Bradburd 2014 IBD vs IBE, and Circuitscape + ResistanceGA. Use when identifying adaptive loci across gradients, choosing K for LFMM2, deciding among GEA methods, predicting maladaptation with the novel-environment caveat, distinguishing IBD vs IBE, or optimizing sampling 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。

Controls error rates across thousands of simultaneous tests in genomics discovery using false-discovery-rate methods (Benjamini-Hochberg 1995; Benjamini-Yekutieli 2001 for arbitrary dependence; Storey q-value with pi0 estimation; local FDR; independent filtering Bourgon 2010; covariate-weighted FDR via IHW Ignatiadis 2016), plus family-wise error control (Bonferroni, Holm) and the GWAS genome-wide threshold. Covers the FDR-versus-FWER choice as the discovery-versus-confirmatory distinction, the dependence assumptions behind BH (PRDS) versus BY, pi0 estimation, the independent-filtering and false-coverage-rate traps, and reproducibility ranking via IDR (Li 2011). Use when correcting p-values from genome-wide tests, choosing between BH/BY/q-value/Bonferroni, setting an FDR threshold, applying IHW or independent filtering, or interpreting q-values. For confirmatory trials with few pre-specified endpoints (closed testing, graphical/gatekeeping), see clinical-biostatistics/multiplicity-graphical.

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。

Implements multiplicity control for confirmatory clinical trials using graphical procedures (Bretz-Maurer-Hommel), gatekeeping (parallel, serial, mixed), Hochberg/Hommel/Holm with PRDS, and the closed-testing principle (Marcus-Peritz-Gabriel; Goeman 2021 admissibility). Covers FDA Multiple Endpoints Final Guidance (October 2022), graphical procedures via R gMCP, primary + key-secondary + subgroup hierarchies, and FWER vs FDR distinction. Use when designing the multiplicity strategy for confirmatory trials with multiple primary or key secondary endpoints.

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。

Project workflow for PRDs, task tracking, changelog sync, and documentation updates. Use for any non-trivial task that spans multiple steps, touches several files, changes architecture, or needs project tracking updates. Also activates with @update to sync task.md, changelog.md, and files.md after completing 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。

Structure AI work artifacts under .aiwork/{YYYY-MM-DD}_{slug}/ folders using the project's protocol (intent, triage, research, spec, prd, areas, plan, review, notes, docs/). Use when the user asks to plan, capture an intent, make a spec, triage, research a task, write a report, code review, summarize findings, save the work, document decisions, record this, write that down, persist findings, or references any path under .aiwork/. Also use when starting a non-trivial task that needs a plan or spec before implementation, or when finishing one and capturing notes.

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 the current conversation context into a spec. Use when user wants to create a spec (or PRD) from the current 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。

Break a plan/PRD into independent vertical-slice Beads issues with explicit dependencies.

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 collaborative requirements discovery before implementation. Creates task directory, seeds PRD, asks high-value questions one at a time, researches technical choices, and converges on MVP scope. Use when requirements are unclear, there are multiple valid approaches, or the user describes a new feature or complex task.

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 whether a "current product focus receipt" (Decision/Now/Why-now/Evidence/Not-now/Cut-suspend/First-visible-proof/ Acceptance-gate/Kill-revisit-trigger/Owner/Review-date) and the work order it gates state a real, testable decision and a real agent launch — not planning-placeholder prose that sounds like an assignment but can't be proven. Use when deciding whether to launch an agent chain against a milestone or a stated "focus," when a work order lacks explicit input/output/owner/proof-gate, or when an acceptance gate would only prove a cached UI state instead of daemon truth. NOT for distinguishing roadmap items from energy-driven sidequests (legible-roadmap-with-sidequests), reviewing a PRD/prototype for product-completeness gaps like cold start or pricing (product-reality-reviewer), or accepting already-finished work against a personal acceptance bar (port-daddy-user-surrogate-pm-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。