本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

process-design

Designs, documents, and fixes operational processes — mapping the current state, finding where work actually stalls, redesigning the flow, and building controls that hold. Use this when the same failure keeps recurring, when a handoff between teams is unreliable, when onboarding a repeated task, when work takes far longer than the work itself, or when deciding whether to automate, standardize, or eliminate a process.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(2)

  • SKILL.md3.3 KB
  • references/sources.md1.4 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

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。

Process design

Map what happens, not what is supposed to happen

Follow a real instance end to end and record every step, handoff, wait, and rework loop. Talk to the people doing it, who will describe several steps that exist nowhere in the documentation and one or two that everyone has quietly stopped doing.

Then measure two things:

  • Touch time — how long the work actually takes.
  • Elapsed time — how long it takes to get through.

The gap between them is the process. In most broken processes, work is waiting more than ninety percent of the time, which means speeding up the work changes almost nothing. Attack the waits.

Find the real constraint

One step governs throughput. Improving anything else produces inventory in front of the constraint and no more output. Find it: the step with a queue in front of it.

Common constraints that are not the obvious step: a single approver, a specialist everything routes through, a system that only one team can access, and a batch cycle that makes everything wait for the weekly run.

Redesign

In this order, because the order is the leverage:

  1. Eliminate. Does this step need to exist? Many exist to catch a failure that a different fix would prevent entirely.
  2. Simplify. Fewer handoffs, fewer approvals, fewer systems. Every handoff is a place work stops.
  3. Standardize. One way of doing it, written down, with the decision rules explicit.
  4. Automate. Last. Automating an unexamined process makes a bad process faster and much harder to change.

Push approval to the lowest level that can be accountable, and set thresholds so routine cases do not queue behind exceptional ones.

Make it hold

A documented process that relies on discipline degrades within a quarter. Build the control into the system: required fields, blocking gates, defaults that are correct, automated handoffs.

Never fix a recurring failure with a reminder. If people are forgetting a step, the system permits forgetting it. Fix that.

Sources

references/sources.md in this skill lists the outside authorities that settle the questions here — what each one is authoritative for, and what you may do with it. Check them before answering on anything they cover, and cite what you used. Most are free to read and not free to reproduce; the use note on each is binding.

Never

  • Redesign from the documented process. Map what people actually do first.
  • Optimize a step that is not the constraint. Everything you speed up ahead of it just queues.
  • Add an approval to prevent a failure that happened once.
  • Hand over a process with no owner and no measure. It reverts within a quarter.

Return contract

Current state with elapsed and touch time, the constraint and its evidence, the redesign, what it costs to implement, and the measure that will show it worked.

レビュー

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。

同じリポジトリのスキル

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。

cbrock84/headcount2,0322026年9月18日 更新

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。

cbrock84/headcount2,0322026年9月18日 更新

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。

cbrock84/headcount2,0322026年9月18日 更新

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。

cbrock84/headcount2,0322026年9月18日 更新

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。

cbrock84/headcount2,0322026年9月18日 更新

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。

cbrock84/headcount2,0322026年9月18日 更新

cbrock84 のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する