uv-best-practices
uvใใใฑใผใธใใใผใธใฃใผใฎๆ้ฉๆดป็จใจใฏใผใฏใใญใผ็ฎก็ในใญใซ
uvใใใฑใผใธใใใผใธใฃใผใฎๆ้ฉๆดป็จใจใฏใผใฏใใญใผ็ฎก็ในใญใซ
Applies the Hamburger Method to slice features into vertical deliverable pieces. Use when user asks how to slice work, break down features into layers, or wants to deliver incrementally. Helps generate 4-5 options per layer and compose minimal vertical slices. Use when: - Feature feels large but not obviously splittable with story-splitting heuristics - User asks "how to slice" or "how to deliver incrementally" - Need to generate multiple implementation options - Want to compose end-to-end vertical slices Do NOT use when: - Story has obvious "and", "or", "manage" indicators (use story-splitting instead) - User is asking HOW to implement (use micro-steps-coach instead) - Feature is already small (< 1 day work)
Entry point for ALL work requests - triages scope from trivial to massive, asks clarifying questions, and routes to appropriate planning skills. Use this when receiving any new work request.
This skill should be used when the user asks to "create ADR", "document decision", "architecture decision", "add decision record", or mentions needing to record a technical decision with status tracking and category organization.
๊ณํ ์๋ฆฝ ๋ฐ ์๋ ํ๋๋ ์ํฌํ๋ก์ฐ ์คํ. "๊ณํ", "๊ณํ ์ธ์์ค", "ํ๋๋", "plan", "๊ตฌํ ๊ณํ", "๊ณํ ๋จผ์ ", "๋ถ์ํ๊ณ ๊ตฌํ", "์ค๊ณ", "์ํฌํ๋ก์ฐ" ํค์๋๋ก ํ์ฑํ. ๋ณ๋ ฌ ํ์ ์์ด์ ํธ๋ก ์ฝ๋๋ฒ ์ด์ค ๋ถ์, ๋ค์ค ๊ด์ ๊ณํ ์๋ฆฝ, ์์กด์ฑ ๊ธฐ๋ฐ ๋ณ๋ ฌ ์คํ ์ง์. ๋ณต์กํ ์์ ์ ๊ตฌ์กฐํ๋ ๊ณํ์ด ํ์ํ ๋ ์ฌ์ฉ. (๊ณํ, ํ๋๋, plan, ๊ตฌํ ๊ณํ, ์ค๊ณ, ์ํฌํ๋ก์ฐ, ๋ถ์ ํ ๊ตฌํ)
Facilitate group decision-making. Use when teams need to align on decisions, resolve disagreements, or make collective choices. Covers consensus techniques.
INVOKE for planning and outlining before implementation. Produces visible skeleton then expansion. Use before implementing features or creating structured documents. Triggers: planning, outlining, structuring approaches, roadmaps, breaking into phases.
Create a structured session handoff document for continuity across sessions. Use when ending a work session, switching contexts, or before a break. Captures decisions, progress, code changes, and next steps so a future session can pick up where you left off without losing context.
This skill should be used for development tasks that require detailed technical planning with persistent documentation. Use when the task involves architectural decisions, multi-phase implementation, external dependencies, or when the user explicitly requests an execution plan.
Event Stormingใงใคใใณใ๏ผๅ่ฉใฎ้ๅปๅฝข๏ผใไธญๅฟใซใใณใใณใใป้็ดใปใชใผใใขใใซใๆฝๅบ/ๅฝๅ/ใฌใใฅใผใใไฝๆฅญใซไฝฟใ
PolicyEngine period handling - converting between YEAR, MONTH definition periods and testing patterns
Multi-persona analytical framework for comprehensive code review and decision-making
Provides stable task list sorting across four dimensions (Priority, Due Date, Created Date, Alphabetical) with ascending/descending toggles, tie-breaking rules, and visual sort indicators. Default sort prioritizes VERY IMPORTANT tasks first, then by soonest due date.
๋ฐฑ๊ทธ๋ผ์ด๋์์ ์ฌ๋ฌ ์์ด์ ํธ๊ฐ ๋ณ๋ ฌ๋ก ๊ธฐํ์ ์ํํ๊ณ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋ฅผ ์๋ ์ ์ฅํฉ๋๋ค. ์ธ์ ์ด ์ปจํ ์คํธ ์ ํ์ ๋๋ฌํด๋ ์์ด์ ํธ๋ค์ ๊ณ์ ์คํ๋ฉ๋๋ค. "๋ฐฑ๊ทธ๋ผ์ด๋ ๊ธฐํ", "bg plan", "๋ณ๋ ฌ ๊ธฐํ" ์์ฒญ ์ ํ์ฑํ๋ฉ๋๋ค.
Break down features and requirements into actionable, implementable tasks with clear scope and acceptance criteria
Break down large tasks into smaller, actionable items. Use when planning sprints, estimating work, or creating implementation plans. Covers task breakdown strategies.
Show project detail. Requires authentication. Use for project management operations
Breaks down ANY work into 1-3 hour micro-steps with zero downtime. Use for large refactorings, technical improvements, debugging, research, migrations, or any work that feels too big or risky. Automatically applies expand-contract pattern for risky changes. Forces smallest safe increments for all work types. Use when: - Work feels too big or risky (refactoring, migrations, performance fixes) - Database schema changes, API changes, service replacements - User asks "how do I implement" after deciding what to build - Work will take more than 1 day Do NOT use when: - User is still deciding WHAT to build (use story-splitting or hamburger-method first) - Work is already small (< 3 hours) - User asks for architectural review (use complexity-review instead)
Implements Adversarial Agile Processes (AAP) for document and code review. Challenges assumptions, questions decisions, and suggests improvements. Use when reviewing PRs, documentation, or architectural decisions.
Plan infrastructure capacity for expected load. Use when sizing systems, planning for growth, or analyzing resource requirements. Covers load estimation and resource sizing.