菜单
REPLACE: one-paragraph description. Include TRIGGER phrases (Korean + English) and explicit DO NOT TRIGGER conditions. The description drives auto-load, so invest in it.
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt，粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里，让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
基于 SOC 职业分类
| name | REPLACE-WITH-SKILL-NAME |
| description | REPLACE: one-paragraph description. Include TRIGGER phrases (Korean + English) and explicit DO NOT TRIGGER conditions. The description drives auto-load, so invest in it. |
<Use_When>
<Do_Not_Use_When>
<Why_This_Exists>
</Why_This_Exists>
<Execution_Policy>
<Settings_Reference>
$LANGUAGE: the language setting from plugin.json settings.language (default Korean). Override with --lang=<value>. Presets: Korean, English, Japanese, Chinese. Custom values accepted.
</Settings_Reference><Tool_Usage>
Example 2 — :
<Final_Checklist>
Polish AI-written Korean documents into natural human-sounding Korean by editing files in place. Removes translation-ese (직역체) first — catalog patterns get phrase-level substitution, principle-based judgment handles sentence-level rewrites — while never touching code, identifiers, quotes, or terminology. TRIGGER when: user asks to polish, naturalize, or fix awkward Korean in a document file (e.g., "이 문서 다듬어줘", "번역투 고쳐줘", "한국어 자연스럽게 바꿔줘", "AI 말투 좀 고쳐줘", "문서 교정해줘", "이 마크다운 한국어 좀 사람답게", "polish this Korean doc", "fix the translation-ese"). Also trigger with /doctor-korean-document slash command. DO NOT TRIGGER when: user wants content changes, summarization, or translation to another language; the text is not in a file (inline/pasted text is out of scope); the document is not Korean; or the user only wants spelling/spacing lint (use a dedicated linter).
Auto-create or update GitHub Pull Requests with conventional commit-style titles. Detects base branch, generates PR title and description from branch commits, links related issues, and creates the PR via GitHub API. TRIGGER when: user asks to create a PR, open a pull request, push changes for review, or send work upstream (e.g., "PR 만들어줘", "PR 날려", "풀리퀘 생성해줘", "풀리퀘스트 올려줘", "리뷰 보내줘", "리뷰 올려줘", "이거 PR 해줘", "푸시하고 PR 만들어", "코드 리뷰 요청해줘", "이 브랜치 올려줘", "create a PR", "open a pull request", "send this for review", "push this up for review"). Also trigger with /github-pr slash command. DO NOT TRIGGER when: user is reviewing an existing PR, asking about PR status, or discussing PR workflow without intent to create one now.
End-to-end 5-phase pipeline from idea to code-ready state — analyst intake → ralplan → ralph/team → verifier-gated QA → multi-perspective validation. Artifacts land in .dt-handoff/<slug>/. Auto commit/PR PROHIBITED. TRIGGER on "/autopilot", "autopilot", "build me", "create me", "make me", "I want a/an". DO NOT TRIGGER for brainstorming, single bug fixes, or quick changes.
Interactive requirements-clarification interview that turns a vague request into a pipeline-ready spec. Delegates to the `analyst` agent to surface ambiguities, hidden assumptions, and gaps, then resolves each with the user via `AskUserQuestion` — offering concrete candidate answers (with a marked default where one clearly fits) and batching independent clarifications into one call — and writes a clarified `spec.md` that `/autopilot` and `/ralplan` can consume. TRIGGER when the user has a fuzzy idea/spec/request and wants the ambiguity resolved into clear requirements — "clarify this", "ask me what you need to build this", "interview me to nail down requirements", "이거 애매한데 질문해서 정리해줘", "요구사항 명확히 해줘", "모호한 부분 짚어서 스펙으로 만들어줘", "/interview". DO NOT TRIGGER when the request is already unambiguous (go straight to /ralplan or /autopilot), when the user wants to reach their OWN design decisions by being questioned without being handed answers (use buddy:socratic-interview), or when they just want it built ("그냥 만들어줘",
A predict-then-verify + explain-back reading partner for UNFAMILIAR code, so the structure actually lodges in your head instead of evaporating with an AI summary. Instead of summarizing the code for you, it picks a spot, makes you PREDICT what it does (or who calls it, or what happens) via one AskUserQuestion, then reveals the real code so you learn from the gap — and on the core spots it makes you EXPLAIN the module back in your own words until you can reconstruct it. The partner chooses the mode (predict vs explain-back) per spot by difficulty. You build the mental model; the partner never hands it over. TRIGGER: "grok this code", "help me understand this codebase", "read this code with me", "코드 이해 도와줘", "낯선 코드 파악 같이 해줘", "이 코드베이스 익히게 도와줘", "코드 같이 읽자", "예측하며 코드 읽기". DO NOT TRIGGER: the developer just wants a fast summary or answer ("그냥 요약해줘", "just tell me what this does"), needs to ship a fix right now, is doing a simple factual lookup (a signature, one line), or already understands the code and only needs
Socratic maieutic design interview, driven by structured multiple-choice questions. When a developer brings a vague idea, feature, or design problem, sharpen it into clear decisions by posing ONE focused AskUserQuestion at a time — each option carrying its own reasoning ("X — because …") so the choice captures both the decision and its why. The options are a frame to think against, never a verdict; the choice, and the "Other" escape hatch, are always the developer's. The pen stays in their hand. TRIGGER: "socratic", "maieutic", "deep interview", "interview me to think", "help me decide by asking", "산파법", "소크라테스식으로 물어봐줘", "설계 같이 고민해줘", "생각 정리 인터뷰". DO NOT TRIGGER: the developer just wants code or an answer fast ("just build it", "그냥 짜줘"), wants a direct verdict without being questioned, is doing a simple factual lookup, or already has a detailed spec and only needs execution.