「complexity」の検索結果

Guides an end-to-end data-warehouse migration to Amazon Redshift — discovery, schema/SQL/stored-procedure/macro/script conversion, data migration, validation, performance comparison, and reporting. Source-routed via `references/<source>/`; Teradata (Vantage) is the supported source; additional sources are added as their own `references/<source>/` sets. Text-only knowledge (no executable code) — the AI generates all execution at runtime. Applies when a user wants to migrate Teradata to Amazon Redshift, convert Teradata DDL/SQL/stored procedures/macros/BTEQ to Redshift/RSQL, or assess Teradata-to-Redshift migration complexity. Applies only to migrations targeting Amazon Redshift; migrations to other platforms (Snowflake, BigQuery, Databricks, etc.) are out of scope regardless of source. Does not cover general Redshift administration, performance tuning, or troubleshooting of existing Redshift clusters (no migration involved), or sources not listed under references/.

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 and reduce avoidable Attio integration cost and load by measuring request volume, query complexity, synchronization churn, and retained data before changing architecture. Use when an Attio workload is wasteful or operationally expensive. Trigger with "Attio cost", "reduce Attio API usage", or "Attio sync efficiency".

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 foundational design principles: affordances, signifiers, constraints, feedback, and conceptual models. Use when the user mentions "why is this confusing", "affordance", "error prevention", "discoverability", "human-centered design", "mental model", "mapping", "seven stages of action", "users keep making mistakes", "this is unintuitive", or "people cant figure out how to use it". Also trigger when reducing product complexity or feature creep. Covers the gulfs of execution and evaluation. For usability scoring, see ux-heuristics. For iOS-specific patterns, see ios-hig-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。

Model software around the business domain using bounded contexts, aggregates, and ubiquitous language. Use when the user mentions "domain modeling", "bounded context", "aggregate root", "ubiquitous language", "anti-corruption layer", "context mapping", "domain events", "strategic design", "the code doesnt match the business", or "how do we split this big system". Also trigger when breaking a monolith into services, defining service boundaries, or aligning code structure with business processes. Covers entities vs value objects, domain events, and context mapping strategies. For architecture layers, see clean-architecture. For complexity, see software-design-philosophy.

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 named refactoring transformations to improve code structure without changing behavior. Use when the user mentions "refactor this", "code smells", "extract method", "replace conditional", "technical debt", "move method", "inline variable", "decompose conditional", or "clean up this messy code". Also trigger when cleaning up legacy code, preparing code for new features by restructuring, or identifying which transformation fits a specific code smell. Covers smell-driven refactoring, safe transformation sequences, and testing guards. For code-quality foundations, see clean-code. For managing complexity, see software-design-philosophy.

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 methodological gaps across study design, analysis, validation, bias control, reproducibility, and implementation readiness within a biomedical research area. Use this skill when a user wants to identify what current studies are still methodologically missing, which weaknesses are most consequential, and what upgrade path would produce a stronger next-step study. Always separate design gaps, analysis gaps, validation gaps, and reproducibility gaps. Never treat technical complexity as methodological rigor.

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 evaluating Seth Klarman-style deep value and distressed opportunities: extreme margin of safety, forced sellers, liquidity discounts, complexity, downside protection, and patience.

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。

Complexity-based task routing with Q-Learning optimization, Agent Booster WASM fast-path, and Mixture-of-Experts model 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。

Reflect on previus response and output, based on Self-refinement framework for iterative improvement with complexity triage and verification

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。

Launch an intelligent sub-agent with automatic model selection based on task complexity, specialized agent matching, Zero-shot CoT reasoning, and mandatory self-critique verification

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。

Triage an incoming insurance claim: check the coverage trigger against policy wording, band severity and complexity, screen for fraud indicators, set a first-pass reserve range, and route with an SLA. Use when asked to triage a claim, review a first notice of loss (FNOL), assess a new claim, decide fast-track vs adjuster routing, or screen a claim for SIU referral. Produces a structured triage note with coverage view, severity band, indicator screen, reserve range, and a routing 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 defining ambiguous or high-complexity new features, product behavior, UI/component design, architecture choices, contract changes, or when grilling/pressure-testing a plan or design. Routine small requests stay on the fast path.

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。

AI code quality checks. The Big 5: input validation, edge cases, error handling, duplication, complexity. Triggers: quality, big 5, ai code, review, validate.

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。

Turns Hi-C/Micro-C FASTQ into a deduplicated, filtered .pairs file with pairtools and decides whether the library worked. Covers the bwa mem -SP5M / bwa-mem2 / chromap --preset hic alignment idiom (mates mapped as independent single-end reads), pairtools parse vs parse2 and the walks-policy choice (5unique pairwise vs all for Pore-C/Micro-C concatemers), pair-type classification (keep UU and rescued UC), dedup (PCR vs optical/by-tile), select by pair_type/MAPQ/distance, restriction-fragment handling (restrict, Arima dual-enzyme, Micro-C/DNase fragment-free), and allele-specific phasing (pairtools phase to two coolers). The library-QC decision uses % long-range cis as the one-number quality metric, trans as the noise floor, orientation balance as fragment-map-free dangling-end/self-circle QC, and % duplicates as a complexity proxy. Use when processing Hi-C/Micro-C/Omni-C reads into pairs, judging library quality, handling multi-enzyme or restriction-agnostic protocols, or generating allele-specific contacts.

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。

Aligns and QCs methylated-RNA-immunoprecipitation (MeRIP / m6A-seq) IP and input libraries using STAR or HISAT2 splice-aware mapping, samtools sort/index, IP/input matched-pair tracking, antibody-lot metadata recording, replicate concordance via deepTools multiBamSummary + plotCorrelation, IP enrichment QC via plotFingerprint and per-transcript IP/input ratio distributions, library-complexity saturation curves via PreSeq, and the explicit do-NOT-deduplicate convention for standard non-UMI MeRIP. Use when preparing paired IP and input BAM files for exomePeak2 / MeTPeak / MACS3 peak calling, evaluating MeRIP replicate concordance and IP enrichment, deciding whether to deduplicate (standard MeRIP typically NOT), choosing genome-vs-transcriptome alignment for downstream peak vs m6Anet workflows, recording antibody clone and lot metadata for cross-batch reconciliation, detecting failed IPs via saturation curves and IP/input distribution shape, or generating IP-over-Input bigWig tracks for visualisation.

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。

Quality control for pooled CRISPR screens covering library representation, Gini index, log-skew, replicate Pearson and Spearman concordance, essentialome precision-recall AUC against CEGv2 (Hart 2017), Cas9 cut-toxicity diagnostics, copy-number amplicon detection (Aguirre 2016 / Munoz 2016), bottleneck propagation through plasmid pool, infection, selection, and endpoint stages, MOI verification, and DepMap-style screen-quality scoring. Use when assessing screen quality before hit calling, deciding whether to repeat or rescue a screen, diagnosing low-confidence hits, choosing between MAGeCK / BAGEL2 / Chronos based on quality grade, picking a normalization strategy from QC signatures, or evaluating whether an in-vivo screen retained adequate library complexity.

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。

Comprehensive quality control for CLIP-seq libraries (eCLIP, iCLIP, iCLIP2, PAR-CLIP) covering library complexity (preseq), FRiP, IDR replicate reproducibility, read-distribution metagene, SMInput vs IgG control rationale, rRNA / snoRNA contamination, fragment-length distribution, and ENCODE-compliance thresholds. Use when assessing whether a CLIP library passed, deciding lenient vs stringent peak thresholds, comparing replicates with IDR rescue and self-consistency ratios, or distinguishing failed IP from over-amplified library.

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。

ATAC-seq library quality control -- TSS enrichment, FRiP, fragment-size periodicity, library complexity (NRF/PBC1/PBC2), mitochondrial fraction, and ENCODE 4 thresholds. Use when assessing whether an ATAC-seq library passes ENCODE acceptance criteria, diagnosing transposition artefacts, comparing Omni-ATAC vs standard prep quality, or selecting which replicates to drop before peak calling.

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。

Collect and assess quality metrics for Simulink models using the metric.Engine API. Use when evaluating model design quality (maintainability, complexity, architecture) or testing completeness (unit testing, SIL, PIL, coverage, pass rates) after edits or test runs. Covers metric discovery, collection, report generation, and diagnostics. Triggers on: "collect metrics", "quality metrics", "metric.Engine", "testing metrics", "maintainability metrics", "SIL metrics", "PIL metrics", "what metrics are available", "assess quality", "coverage metrics", "generate metric report", "diagnose metric errors".

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 code coverage and CRAP (Change Risk Anti-Patterns) scores to identify high-risk code. Use OpenCover format with ReportGenerator for Risk Hotspots showing cyclomatic complexity and untested code paths.

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 Swift API Design Guidelines to name, label, and document Swift APIs. Covers argument label rules (prepositional phrase rule, grammatical phrase rule, first-label omission), mutating/nonmutating pair naming (-ed/-ing participle pattern, form- prefix, sort/sorted, formUnion/union), side-effect naming (noun for pure, verb for mutating), documentation comment structure (summary by declaration kind, O(1) complexity rule), clarity at call site, role-based naming, protocol naming (-able/-ible/-ing), default arguments over method families, casing conventions, and terminology. Use when designing new Swift APIs, reviewing naming and argument labels, writing documentation comments, or refactoring for call site clarity.

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。

Review changed code for naming, stale references, unnecessary complexity, and comment quality. Use after completing implementation work, before committing, or when the user asks to review or audit code.

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。

Optional design-improvement pass for when you have spare usage to drain. Finds the shallowest modules in the code the spec touches, researches a deeper design, and proposes refactors that shrink interfaces and hide decisions — behavior held constant, tests green before and after. Proposes §I/§V/§T edits, never silent rewrites. Triggers when the user says "deepen this", "improve the design", "this module feels shallow", "pull complexity down", "use spare budget on the codebase", or invokes /ck:deepen. Leans on the codebase-design skill's deep-module vocabulary when present.

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 systematic problem-solving techniques when stuck. Use for complexity spirals, innovation blocks, recurring patterns, assumption constraints, simplification cascades, scale uncertainty.

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。