菜单
Detects when SPEC.md or PRD.md exceeds 300 lines and proposes feature-based splitting with a master route document. Use when SPEC.md grows too large to be effectively used as a single document.
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
Apply the fixed model-role and thinking-effort policy whenever work is delegated to subagents or a model/effort choice is made: the orchestrator (top-tier model) DIRECTLY sets service direction, reviews plan/spec documents (with multi-persona-review), improves shipped features, and hunts performance/security problems; plan/spec/planning documents are AUTHORED by Opus, which also owns core implementation and V&V, at xhigh or above; repetitive implementation and E2E tests go to Sonnet at high or above — never delegate below those effort floors. Use whenever you are about to spawn an Agent/Task/Workflow worker, pick a model for a subtask, set a thinking/effort level, assign verification, or hand off orchestration because the current model's quota is exhausted. Trigger on "위임해", "에이전트로 돌려", "오케스트레이션", "모델 역할분담", "어떤 모델로", "effort 얼마로", "thinking level", "서브에이전트", or in English "delegate this", "spawn an agent for", "which model should", "route this task", "verify with", "orchestrate". Fire even when the user does
Treats GitHub Issues as the async backlog + decision channel between user and AI agent. Use when a non-blocking todo / bug / decision needs to persist beyond the chat session. Enforces 5-section body template (Background / Given / Decision / AC / Next) so issues become reusable agent context, not just sticky notes.
Defines and enforces a project's long-term direction (North Star Statement, NSM, Will/Won't, 4-gate decision heuristic). Use when starting a new project, when scope creep is suspected, or when a non-obvious feature request needs prioritization. Sits one layer above SPEC/PRD — answers 'why and where to', not 'what and how'.
Captures screenshots of key UI flows after E2E tests pass, runs an agent-side first-pass diff (regressions, console errors, layout shifts), then surfaces a checklist for the user's final approval. Use after E2E tests pass on a UI track (csr-*, ssr-*, full). Adapts the GoalTrack screenshot-review pattern into a repeatable workflow.
Two-mode chained gap analysis. DETECT scans the current service end-to-end through three lenses — north-star alignment, correctness (bugs), and user-perspective (UX) — and enumerates concrete, severity-ranked gaps. Then BENCHMARK researches how reference/benchmark services actually solved each high-ranked gap and PROPOSES a closing approach. Use when the user says any of: "북극성 기준으로 부족한 점", "사용자 관점에서 부족한 점", "다른 벤치마크 서비스는 이 부분을 어떻게 해결했는지", "갭분석", "레퍼런스 서비스랑 비교해서 부족한 점 찾아줘" — or the English equivalents: "gap analysis", "what are we missing vs the ideal/north-star", "benchmark against reference services". Fires for both Korean and English phrasing. NOT for a whole-codebase multi-dimension audit (use ultracode-service-audit) or single-artifact prose review (use multi-persona-review) — this is the narrower gap-vs-benchmark loop.
A panel-review skill that critiques ONE artifact (launch post, README, doc, markdown, plan, design) via 3-5 disjoint user-perspective personas running in parallel, then synthesizes deduped, severity-ranked improvement points (P0/P1/P2). Use when the user says "작성글을 사용자 관점의 페르소나를 여러명 만들어서 (손넷 모델정도로) 피드백 받아바", "다면 리뷰 해볼까", "페르소나로 리뷰", "여러 관점으로 피드백", or in English "multi-persona review", "review this from different user perspectives", "get persona feedback on this post/README/doc", "panel review this artifact". Lighter than a full service audit — point it at ONE artifact, not a whole codebase. NOT for a whole-codebase multi-dimension audit (use ultracode-service-audit) or a single-axis gap-vs-benchmark loop (use gap-analysis-e2e).
| name | spec-scaling |
| description | Detects when SPEC.md or PRD.md exceeds 300 lines and proposes feature-based splitting with a master route document. Use when SPEC.md grows too large to be effectively used as a single document. |
SPEC.md 또는 PRD.md가 300줄을 초과했을 때 자동 트리거.
docs/
├── SPEC.md # 마스터 — 공통 규칙 + 각 기능 파일 라우트
├── specs/
│ ├── auth.md # 인증/인가 기능 스펙
│ ├── dashboard.md # 대시보드 기능 스펙
│ └── payment.md # 결제 기능 스펙
docs/
├── PRD.md # 마스터 — 비전, 사용자, 큰 그림 + 영역 파일 라우트
└── PRD/ # 영역별 세부 사양
├── platform-common.md # 플랫폼 공통 (인증, 권한, 인프라)
├── feature-screener.md # 스크리너 영역
├── feature-portfolio.md # 포트폴리오 영역
└── feature-simulator.md # 시뮬레이터 영역
Vantage 프로젝트의
.claude/PRD/구조를 일반화한 것 (도메인 비종속). 본 패턴에서는docs/PRD/하위에 위치. 두 패턴 모두 마스터 = 인덱스 + 공통, 하위 = 독립 참조 가능 단위 원칙.
# SPEC: [프로젝트명]
## 공통 규칙
[전체 적용 Boundaries, Tech Stack, DO NOT CHANGE]
## 기능별 스펙
- [인증/인가](specs/auth.md)
- [대시보드](specs/dashboard.md)
- [결제](specs/payment.md)
# PRD: [프로젝트명]
## 1. 비전 / Personas / NSM
[North Star 요약 (없으면 생략)]
## 2. 영역별 사양
- [Platform Common](PRD/platform-common.md) — 인증/권한/인프라
- [Feature: Screener](PRD/feature-screener.md)
- [Feature: Portfolio](PRD/feature-portfolio.md)
## 3. 영역 간 의존성
- Screener → Portfolio (선택 결과 전달)
- All → Platform Common (인증 의존)
| 경우 | 분리 대상 |
|---|---|
| 비즈니스 맥락 / 사용자 시나리오가 큰 비중 | PRD 우선 분리 |
| 기술 스펙이 핵심 (API, 데이터 모델, AC) | SPEC 우선 분리 |
| 둘 다 큰 경우 | PRD를 영역별로, SPEC를 기능별로 (서로 cross-link) |