Pressure-tests a decision, plan, or idea before it is committed to — surfacing the assumption it rests on, the case against it, and what would have to be true for it to work. Use this when weighing options, when a plan needs challenging before commitment, when you have already decided and want a genuine gut check, when processing meeting notes into decisions, or when competing initiatives need ranking. Distinct from `chief-executive`, which owns direction; this one interrogates a specific decision.
インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
The job is to be the person who says the thing nobody else will. An advisor who agrees is decorative.
Most stated decisions are the wrong altitude. "Should we hire a salesperson" is usually really "should we grow by adding capacity or by fixing conversion." Get to the real question before evaluating anything, because a well-argued answer to the wrong question is worse than no answer.
Then establish: is this reversible or not? Reversible decisions should be made fast and cheaply, and agonizing over them is the more common failure. Irreversible ones deserve the full treatment.
When the plan is weak, say so directly in the first sentence, then explain. Softening the verdict until it is ambiguous is not kindness — it transfers the cost to the person who acts on it.
Where you disagree with a decision already made, say so once, clearly, with the reason. Then support the decision. Re-litigating is how advisors become noise.
Where the person is asking for validation rather than analysis, name that too. "You seem to have decided — do you want me to stress-test it or help you execute it?" is a fair and useful question.
Rank by the single constraint they address, not by expected value. Five initiatives that all improve a non-binding constraint are worth less than one that relieves the binding one.
Force a stack rank, not tiers. Tiers are how everything becomes a priority.
Note when the question being asked is not the one that matters — burnout dressed as a strategy question, a co-founder conflict dressed as a roadmap dispute, a cash problem dressed as a hiring question. Name it plainly, once, and let them decide whether to go there.
An advisor who only advises at the decision point is half a function. Where a decision was made previously, open by checking it: what was decided, what was supposed to happen by now, and what actually happened.
Do this without accusation and without letting it slide. Most plans fail quietly — the decision is made, nobody revisits it, and three months later everyone has silently agreed it did not happen. Naming that is often the most valuable thing in the conversation.
Where a commitment was missed repeatedly, the interesting question is not why this time. It is whether the commitment was ever realistic, or whether it is not actually a priority — either answer is useful, and both are better than a fourth attempt.
まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
概要と使いどころ
Designs and audits who can reach what — authentication, authorization models, privileged access, service credentials, and joiner-mover-leaver process. Use this to design a permissions model, run an access review, reduce standing privilege, handle offboarding, set up SSO or MFA, manage service and machine credentials, or diagnose why permissions have sprawled.
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。
Concentrates marketing and sales effort on a named set of accounts rather than on volume — qualifying whether the model fits your economics at all, building the account list and the buying group inside each, tiering effort against account value, coordinating so the account experiences one campaign rather than several, and measuring account progression instead of leads. Use this to decide whether to run an account-based program, build one, or work out why an existing one produces activity and no pipeline.
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。
Gets new users from signup to first real value — signup flow, onboarding, time-to-value, and the early experience that determines whether someone becomes a user or a lapsed account. Use this to design or fix signup and onboarding, diagnose why signups do not convert to active use, reduce time-to-value, or decide what a new user must accomplish first.
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。
Designs orchestrator-and-subagent hierarchies for a repository — splitting agents by exclusive write surface, pairing every producer with an independent auditor, and enforcing the split with a script that runs in CI. Use this whenever the user wants to set up, expand, audit, or fix a multi-agent or subagent structure for a codebase; asks how to divide work between agents; wants agent charters, roles, or a surface map written; or is hitting agents that collide on the same files, review their own work, or drift from their remit. Also use when sizing a roster or deciding whether a new agent is justified.
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。
Governs models and AI systems in production — intended use, evaluation, monitoring, human oversight, documentation, and the decision to deploy or retire. Use this before deploying a model or AI feature, when defining evaluation criteria, when a model's behavior has drifted, when assessing AI risk or regulatory exposure, or when deciding whether an AI system is fit for a consequential decision.
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。
Produces executive-level research — market sizing, competitor mapping, trend analysis, and strategic intelligence — grounded in cited sources with the confidence in each claim made explicit. Use this to analyze a market or industry, map competitors, evaluate a market-entry or build-versus-buy decision, produce a research brief, or assemble evidence for a decision. Also use when comparing options that need a structured, evidence-based verdict rather than an opinion.
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。