193 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Technical decision-making frameworks - trade-off evaluation, reversibility analysis, and second-order thinking for better engineering choicesUse when "should we, which is better, trade-off, decision, choose between, versus, pros and cons, what if we, is it worth, evaluate options, decisions, trade-offs, architecture, adr, reversibility, strategy, planning, risk" mentioned.
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。
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。
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。
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。
矛盾分析法：把复杂问题拆成若干对立面，找出规定其他矛盾的主要矛盾及其主要方面，判定对抗性 / 非对抗性，并据此选择处理方式。当问题头绪多、多个因素互相牵制、优先级不清、根因不明、反复修不好、trade-off 说不清时触发；直接执行类任务或用户已定方案时不触发。 English: Contradiction analysis. Decompose a tangled problem into opposing forces, isolate the principal contradiction and its dominant side, classify it as antagonistic or non-antagonistic, and choose the response accordingly. Trigger on unclear priorities, unknown root causes, recurring failures, or trade-offs that resist explanation; skip for direct execution or when the user has already chosen the solution.
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。
统筹兼顾：当多个目标、指标或利益方相互制约、优化一项会伤害另一项时，识别全部辩证关系对，检查片面性，为每对关系定出当前阶段的侧重与底线，评估系统性影响，并设失衡预警。触发信号包括 trade-off、目标冲突、速度 vs 质量、短期 vs 长期、"顾此失彼"；只有单一目标、用户已定取舍、或属硬性二选一时不触发。 English: Overall planning. When several goals, metrics, or stakeholders constrain each other and optimizing one harms another, map every dialectical pair, check for one-sidedness, set the current emphasis and floor for each pair, assess system-wide effects, and define imbalance alarms. Triggers include trade-offs, goal conflicts, speed vs quality, short vs long term; skip for single-goal work, decisions the user already made, or hard either/or 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。
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 building figures and tables for an Agricultural Systems (AgSy) manuscript so exhibits communicate interactions, dynamics, trade-offs, and model performance clearly. AgSy is a systems journal, so the best exhibits show trade-off frontiers, observed-vs-simulated fit, resource flows, and conceptual system diagrams — not just a bar chart of one treatment. Designs exhibits; it does not run the 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。
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。
Expert in feature prioritization - the art and science of deciding what to build and in what order. Covers prioritization frameworks, roadmap planning, stakeholder management, and the trade-offs between different approaches. Knows that prioritization is about saying no, and how to make those decisions defensible. Use when "prioritization, roadmap, what to build, feature request, backlog, scope, trade-off, " mentioned.
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。
Architecture Decision Framework workflow skill. Use this skill when the user needs Architectural decision-making framework. Requirements analysis, trade-off evaluation, ADR documentation. Use when making architecture decisions or analyzing system design and the operator should preserve the upstream workflow, copied support files, and provenance before merging or handing off.
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。
Architecture Decision Framework workflow skill. Use this skill when the user needs Architectural decision-making framework. Requirements analysis, trade-off evaluation, ADR documentation. Use when making architecture decisions or analyzing system design and the operator should preserve the upstream workflow, copied support files, and provenance before merging or handing off.
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。
N-round opposing-stance debates for trade-off analysis. Assigns pro/con roles to agents, runs structured debate rounds with quality scoring, and produces a moderator synthesis with confidence-rated recommendation. Generalizable to architecture, technology, security, and design decisions.
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。
Multi-agent collaboration session. Brings 2-4 agent perspectives into one discussion for architecture decisions and trade-off analysis. Use when asked "should we X or Y?", "let's discuss", or "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 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。
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.
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.
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。
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。
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。