「implementation」の検索結果

Run the Nexent requirement or bug lifecycle from SPEC analysis through feature catalog and D1-D5 case design, product implementation, fixed test implementation, local verification, and delivery evidence. Use for features, fixes, refactors, APIs, UI, and model or Agent runtime changes.

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 one unattended IDEATION iteration of the quality-assurance loop — find the highest-value untested behavior in the codebase, judge it against the QA value bar, and file ONE locked `qa` issue specifying the test to write. Never writes code or tests; the next-qa skill builds from the queue this skill fills. Use when the user says "QAアイデア", "next qa idea", or wants the QA backlog refilled without implementation.

Run one unattended IDEATION iteration of the autonomous value-creation loop — invent improvements a user of cc-wf-studio would notice, judge them against the value bar, and file the winners as locked `idea` issues. Never implements anything; the next-task skill builds from the queue this skill fills. Use when the user says "アイデア出して", "next idea", or wants proposals without implementation.

Run one unattended IMPLEMENTATION iteration of the autonomous value-creation loop — steward any in-flight PR, fix interrupts (red CI / security / human bugs), or else build ONE queued `idea` issue on a branch off auto-dev and open a PR that squash-merges on green CI. Ideation lives in the next-idea skill; this skill consumes its queue. Use when the user says "次のタスク", "next task", "続きをやって", or wants autonomous progress without specifying what to do.

Core module implementation for claude-flow v3. Implements DDD domains, clean architecture patterns, dependency injection, and modular TypeScript codebase with comprehensive testing.

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。

Scope a feature end to end and write an implementation spec under specs/ from an accepted proposal — current-system mapping, goals/non-goals, a Decision Log for one-way-door choices, a live Open Questions backlog, and a real migration + test plan. Read when asked to write a spec, scope this feature, turn this proposal into a spec, plan the implementation, or break this into tasks. Do NOT fire on frame a proposal or write the PRD (sibling frame-a-proposal — a PRD frames a change before it is accepted; this skill starts once one is), record a decision or write the ADR (record-a-decision), write a postmortem (write-a-postmortem), or review this design (review-a-design) — those are separate skills. Complements the platform open-knowledge skill; does not replace it.

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。

Carry implementation through an isolated worktree and local handoff. Use only when this skill is explicitly invoked.

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 completed implementation changes before final verification. Use when repository policy requires independent review or the user explicitly requests it.

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 technical implementation plans from feature specifications. Use after creating a spec to define architecture, tech stack, and implementation phases. Creates plan.md with detailed technical 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。

Maintain a structured planning document tree made of roadmap/status files, implementation status or handoff TODO files, topic notes, decision records, open questions, ideas/inspiration pools, and repository/file-structure hygiene plans. Use when Codex needs to create, reorganize, audit, or update a multi-file plan, design-doc folder, roadmap tree, active implementation-status file, repo cleanup/filesystem plan, ADR/decision log, ideas inbox, or linked planning knowledge base; reconcile Done/In Progress/Next state; resume work from TODO/handoff state; move resolved questions into decisions; promote ideas into formal plan artifacts; or keep plan documents and file-structure planning internally consistent without making this project-specific.

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。

Independently check whether an implementation matches its stated goal and return PASS/WARN/FAIL with actionable issues. Use for second-opinion validation of an implementation or generated 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。

[omh] Accepted plan awaiting implementation: split it into disjoint parallel lanes with per-lane acceptance criteria, verification commands, and owners; prevents two lanes editing the same file. Aliases: ulw. Use when the user says: ultrawork, parallel work, parallel implementation, parallel then integrate, high throughput, coding team, coordinated workers, finish until done.

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。

Verify implementation matches change artifacts. Use when the user wants to validate that implementation is complete, correct, and coherent before archiving.

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 implementation of code tasks using test-driven development in an Explore, Plan, Code, Commit workflow. Acts as a Technical Implementation Partner and TDD Coach — following existing patterns, avoiding over-engineering, and producing idiomatic, modern 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。

Interactive discovery + implementation workflow that gathers requirements through picker-based questions (intent, scope, constraints, preferences), scans the codebase for what it can already infer, then writes an AWS architectural scaffold and implementation directly into the project. Use when the user wants to build a new app, scaffold a project, or expand/refactor an existing one on AWS — anything that calls for a structured discovery flow followed by code changes, not a one-off lookup. Do not use for: factual lookups about AWS Activate / programs / credits, requests for a single copy-paste prompt, non-AWS architectural work, architecture advice/recommendations without code changes (see architect-for-startups), a new idea centered on an AI agent — runtime selection, agentic architecture, or an agent POC (see agent-advisor), or migrating an existing GCP/Azure/Heroku workload or an LLM SDK rewrite (see gcp-to-aws / azure-to-aws / heroku-to-aws / llm-to-bedrock).

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。

Creates detailed, sectionized implementation plans through research, stakeholder interviews, and multi-LLM review. Use when planning features that need thorough pre-implementation 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。

Drives implementation by writing a failing test first, then the smallest code that passes it. Use this before writing implementation code for any feature or bugfix, when a bug needs a regression test, when existing code is hard to change safely, or when someone asks whether a change is covered. Also use to decide what is worth testing and what is not.

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 a spec or requirement into a written plan a separate session or agent can execute, then drives that plan through review checkpoints. Use this before touching code on any multi-step task, when work needs handing to someone else, when a task keeps sprawling mid-implementation, or when a plan exists and needs executing in order with verification between steps.

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。

Ensures projects deliver the value they were approved on — defining measurable benefits, baselining, tracking after delivery, and honest post-implementation review. Use this to define benefits for a business case, set a baseline, track whether value actually landed, or run a post-implementation review that produces something useful.

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 product or tech specs into concrete Notion tasks that Claude code can implement. Breaks down spec pages into detailed implementation plans with clear tasks, acceptance criteria, and progress tracking to guide development from requirements to completion.

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。

Explore user intent, requirements, and design options through collaborative dialogue before implementation. Use before building new features, components, or systems — whenever the user describes something to build and design decisions are involved. Triggers: "brainstorm", "help me design", "think through the requirements", "头脑风暴", "设计方案", "梳理需求". Not for bug fixes, config changes, or tasks with an obvious implementation 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。

Compare two implementations of the same thing — a port (R↔Python↔Stata), a reimplementation, a replication package, a refactor, or a new version against the old — so that agreement means something. Freeze inputs first, inventory every expected output, test the comparator itself, compare every channel (not just the headline number), and give each divergence a stable ID and a smallest witness. Use for cross-language parity, replication, upgrade/regression gates, or whenever "the numbers match" is about to license a claim.

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 the creation of technical design documents before writing code, producing architecture diagrams, data models, API interface definitions, implementation plans, and multi-option trade-off analyses. Use when the user asks to plan a feature, architect a system, design an API, explore implementation approaches, or requests a technical design or spec before coding — especially for complex features involving multiple components, ambiguous requirements, or significant architectural changes.

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 resume an evidence-based RPI implementation plan with an optional independent critique. Use when a task needs an implementation plan or an existing plan needs revision.

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。