毛利裕介｜経営戦略を実行に結びつける、開発出身の実装型コンサルタント

@rabirgo

戦略実行設計者（Execution Architect）。経営のアイデアを技術・PM・構造理解を用いて“動く仕組み”に翻訳する人。株式会社ラヴィ代表 / 福岡

福岡市博多区

Joined February 2013

326 Following

426 Followers

15.8K Posts

rabirgo retweeted

Google

@Google

12 days ago

For over 20 years, we've dedicated ourselves to removing language barriers so people can learn, speak and connect more deeply than ever before. Today, we’re taking our next step with the release of Gemini 3.5 Live Translate — our latest audio model for live, speech-to-speech translation across 70+ languages. 🧵

Google's tweet photo. For over 20 years, we've dedicated ourselves to removing language barriers so people can learn, speak and connect more deeply than ever before.

Today, we’re taking our next step with the release of Gemini 3.5 Live Translate — our latest audio model for live, speech-to-speech translation across 70+ languages. 🧵

435

937

907K

rabirgo retweeted

Meta Alchemist

@meta_alchemist

12 days ago

Got your hands on Claude Fable 5? The first thing you should do is to upgrade your main projects with it, so it drastically impoves everything you've been working on. Run this Audit & Project Improvement Prompt on each repo that's important to you (simply copy-paste it): Repo Audit & Improvement Plan: Prompt made by Claude Fable 5 You are a world-class principal-level software engineer and technical auditor. Your job is to deeply analyze this repository, produce an honest audit, and deliver a prioritized, actionable improvement plan. Work in the four phases below, in order. Do not skip ahead. Ground every claim in actual files: cite file paths and line numbers. If you can't verify something, say so explicitly rather than guessing. Phase 1 / Discovery & Mapping (read before judging) Explore the repository systematically before forming any opinions: Map the directory structure and identify the project type, language(s), frameworks, and runtime targets. Identify entry points, core modules, and the main data/control flow through the system. Read the package manifest(s), lockfiles, build config, CI config, environment/config files, and any docs (README, CONTRIBUTING, ADRs). Determine what the project is for: its purpose, intended users, and apparent maturity (prototype, internal tool, production service, library). Note conventions already in use (naming, module boundaries, error handling patterns, test style) so recommendations fit the existing culture rather than fighting it. Output for this phase: a concise "Repo Map" purpose, stack, architecture sketch, key directories with one-line descriptions, and anything that surprised you. Phase 2 / Audit (evidence-based, severity-rated) Audit each dimension below. For every finding, record: (a) what you found, (b) where (file:line), (c) why it matters (concrete consequence, not vague principle), (d) severity: Critical / High / Medium / Low. • Architecture & design: module boundaries, coupling/cohesion, circular dependencies, leaky abstractions, god objects/files, layering violations, scalability bottlenecks. • Code quality: duplication, dead code, complexity hotspots (longest/most-branched functions), inconsistent patterns, error handling gaps (swallowed exceptions, missing edge cases), type safety holes. • Security: hardcoded secrets or credentials, injection risks, unsafe deserialization, missing input validation, auth/authz weaknesses, outdated dependencies with known CVEs, overly permissive configs. • Testing: coverage gaps (especially around core business logic), test quality (do tests assert behavior or just execution?), missing test types (unit/integration/e2e), flaky patterns, untestable code. • Performance: N+1 queries, unnecessary allocations or copies, blocking calls in async paths, missing caching/indexing, unbounded growth (memory, files, queues). • Dependencies: outdated, unmaintained, duplicated, or unnecessarily heavy packages; license risks; lockfile hygiene. • DevEx & operations: build/setup friction, CI/CD gaps, missing linting/formatting enforcement, logging/observability quality, error reporting, deployment story. • Documentation: README accuracy, onboarding path, undocumented critical behavior, stale docs that contradict code. Rules for this phase: Prefer 15 high-confidence findings over 50 speculative ones. Distinguish facts ("this function has no error handling: src/api/client.ts:142") from judgments ("this module's responsibilities feel unclear") and label which is which. Also list what the repo does well: strengths matter for deciding what to preserve. Output for this phase: an "Audit Report": findings grouped by dimension, sorted by severity, plus a Strengths section. Don't forget to mention all the ugly parts that need utmost priority. Phase 3 / Improvement Strategy Synthesize the audit into a strategy: Identify the 3–5 themes that explain most of the findings (e.g., "no enforced boundaries between layers," "error handling is ad hoc"). For each theme, propose a target state and the principle behind it. State explicit trade-offs: what you're recommending NOT to fix and why (effort vs. payoff, risk, project maturity). Define what "done" looks like — measurable signals (e.g., "CI fails on lint errors," "core module test coverage ≥ 80%," "zero Critical findings"). Phase 4 / Detailed Task Plan Convert the strategy into an execution plan: Break work into discrete tasks. Each task must include: Title and one-paragraph description Files/areas affected Acceptance criteria (how we verify it's done) Effort estimate (S = <2h, M = half-day, L = 1–2 days, XL = needs breakdown) Risk of the change itself (could it break things?) Dependencies on other tasks Order tasks into milestones: Milestone 0 Safety net: anything needed before refactoring safely (tests around critical paths, CI gates, backups). Milestone 1 Critical fixes: security and correctness issues. Milestone 2 High-leverage improvements: changes that make all future work easier. Milestone 3 Quality & polish: remaining medium/low items worth doing. Flag quick wins (high impact, S effort) separately so they can be done immediately. For the top 3 tasks, include a brief implementation sketch (approach, key steps, gotchas). Final Deliverable Format • Produce a single document with these sections: • Executive Summary (≤10 sentences: overall health grade A–F with justification, top 3 risks, top 3 opportunities) • Repo Map • Audit Report • Improvement Strategy • Task Plan (milestones + task table + quick wins) • Open Questions: anything you need from a human to decide (product intent, deprecation candidates, performance targets) Constraints Do NOT modify any code during this audit. Analysis only. Do not pad the report. If a dimension is healthy, say so in one sentence and move on. Calibrate to the project's maturity. Don't recommend enterprise-grade infrastructure for a weekend prototype unless the owner's goals demand it. Analyze the project's needs and provide recommendations in the most effective ways. If the repo is large, prioritize depth in the core 20% of code that does 80% of the work, and note which areas received lighter review.

meta_alchemist's tweet photo. Got your hands on Claude Fable 5?

The first thing you should do is to upgrade your main projects with it, so it drastically impoves everything you've been working on.

Run this Audit & Project Improvement Prompt on each repo that's important to you (simply copy-paste it):

Repo Audit & Improvement Plan:
Prompt made by Claude Fable 5

You are a world-class principal-level software engineer and technical auditor. Your job is to deeply analyze this repository, produce an honest audit, and deliver a prioritized, actionable improvement plan. Work in the four phases below, in order. Do not skip ahead.

Ground every claim in actual files: cite file paths and line numbers. If you can't verify something, say so explicitly rather than guessing.

Phase 1 / Discovery & Mapping (read before judging)
Explore the repository systematically before forming any opinions:

Map the directory structure and identify the project type, language(s), frameworks, and runtime targets.
Identify entry points, core modules, and the main data/control flow through the system.

Read the package manifest(s), lockfiles, build config, CI config, environment/config files, and any docs (README, CONTRIBUTING, ADRs).

Determine what the project is for: its purpose, intended users, and apparent maturity (prototype, internal tool, production service, library).

Note conventions already in use (naming, module boundaries, error handling patterns, test style) so recommendations fit the existing culture rather than fighting it.

Output for this phase: a concise "Repo Map" purpose, stack, architecture sketch, key directories with one-line descriptions, and anything that surprised you.

Phase 2 / Audit (evidence-based, severity-rated)

Audit each dimension below.

For every finding, record: (a) what you found, (b) where (file:line), (c) why it matters (concrete consequence, not vague principle), (d) severity:

Critical / High / Medium / Low.

• Architecture & design: module boundaries, coupling/cohesion, circular dependencies, leaky abstractions, god objects/files, layering violations, scalability bottlenecks.

• Code quality: duplication, dead code, complexity hotspots (longest/most-branched functions), inconsistent patterns, error handling gaps (swallowed exceptions, missing edge cases), type safety holes.

• Security: hardcoded secrets or credentials, injection risks, unsafe deserialization, missing input validation, auth/authz weaknesses, outdated dependencies with known CVEs, overly permissive configs.

• Testing: coverage gaps (especially around core business logic), test quality (do tests assert behavior or just execution?), missing test types (unit/integration/e2e), flaky patterns, untestable code.

• Performance: N+1 queries, unnecessary allocations or copies, blocking calls in async paths, missing caching/indexing, unbounded growth (memory, files, queues).

• Dependencies: outdated, unmaintained, duplicated, or unnecessarily heavy packages; license risks; lockfile hygiene.

• DevEx & operations: build/setup friction, CI/CD gaps, missing linting/formatting enforcement, logging/observability quality, error reporting, deployment story.

• Documentation: README accuracy, onboarding path, undocumented critical behavior, stale docs that contradict code.

Rules for this phase:

Prefer 15 high-confidence findings over 50 speculative ones.

Distinguish facts ("this function has no error handling: src/api/client.ts:142") from judgments ("this module's responsibilities feel unclear") and label which is which.

Also list what the repo does well: strengths matter for deciding what to preserve.

Output for this phase: an "Audit Report": findings grouped by dimension, sorted by severity, plus a Strengths section.

Don't forget to mention all the ugly parts that need utmost priority.

Phase 3 / Improvement Strategy

Synthesize the audit into a strategy:

Identify the 3–5 themes that explain most of the findings (e.g., "no enforced boundaries between layers," "error handling is ad hoc").

For each theme, propose a target state and the principle behind it.

State explicit trade-offs: what you're recommending NOT to fix and why (effort vs. payoff, risk, project maturity).

Define what "done" looks like — measurable signals (e.g., "CI fails on lint errors," "core module test coverage ≥ 80%," "zero Critical findings").

Phase 4 / Detailed Task Plan
Convert the strategy into an execution plan:

Break work into discrete tasks. Each task must include: Title and one-paragraph description
Files/areas affected

Acceptance criteria (how we verify it's done)
Effort estimate (S = <2h, M = half-day, L = 1–2 days, XL = needs breakdown)

Risk of the change itself (could it break things?)
Dependencies on other tasks

Order tasks into milestones:

Milestone 0
Safety net: anything needed before refactoring safely (tests around critical paths, CI gates, backups).

Milestone 1
Critical fixes: security and correctness issues.

Milestone 2
High-leverage improvements: changes that make all future work easier.

Milestone 3
Quality & polish: remaining medium/low items worth doing.

Flag quick wins (high impact, S effort) separately so they can be done immediately.

For the top 3 tasks, include a brief implementation sketch (approach, key steps, gotchas).

Final Deliverable Format
• Produce a single document with these sections:
• Executive Summary (≤10 sentences: overall health grade A–F with justification, top 3 risks, top 3 opportunities)
• Repo Map
• Audit Report
• Improvement Strategy
• Task Plan (milestones + task table + quick wins)
• Open Questions: anything you need from a human to decide (product intent, deprecation candidates, performance targets)

Constraints
Do NOT modify any code during this audit. Analysis only.

Do not pad the report. If a dimension is healthy, say so in one sentence and move on.

Calibrate to the project's maturity. Don't recommend enterprise-grade infrastructure for a weekend prototype unless the owner's goals demand it.

Analyze the project's needs and provide recommendations in the most effective ways.

If the repo is large, prioritize depth in the core 20% of code that does 80% of the work, and note which areas received lighter review.

179

306

10K

581K

rabirgo retweeted

Claude

@claudeai

12 days ago

Fable 5 is state-of-the-art on nearly all tested benchmarks, with exceptional performance in software engineering, knowledge work, scientific research, and vision. The longer and more complex the task, the larger Fable 5’s lead over our other models.

claudeai's tweet photo. Fable 5 is state-of-the-art on nearly all tested benchmarks, with exceptional performance in software engineering, knowledge work, scientific research, and vision.

The longer and more complex the task, the larger Fable 5’s lead over our other models. https://t.co/DxgSu0KUxh

513

16K

rabirgo retweeted

bamboo🎤7.26 SHIBUYA DIVE無料ギグ

@bamboo_milktub

14 days ago

「酒飲む前にレバ刺し食うと酒が食ったレバーを勘違いしてそっちを攻撃するので、自前の肝臓は無事」という説を提唱しているオッサンが隣のテーブルにいて噴きそうになった。「ドーナツは0だからカロリー0」説を聴いた時に近い衝撃を受けたw

117

69K

14K

Who to follow

さり🐣Webデザイナー

@hiyoko_sassan

Webデザイナー×Webコーダー｜「Webサイトを作ってよかった！」と思ってもらえるよう、一つ一つの案件に心を込めて丁寧に対応いたします | 自分のやりたいことを諦めない | 未経験からフリーランスへ |お仕事のご依頼はDMへ |しめサポ4期学サポデザトレ6期

クロクロ課長＠ワインと旨い飯があればいい

@kurokuro_nex

ネクスウェイブ株式会社契約管理チーム｜アラフォー課長😆ヘタレ課長😂｜不動産業界のおっさんを転がし続けて10年｜ワイン大好き🍷日本酒大好き🍶｜週末は料理とワインに明け暮れる｜料理は目分、雰囲気、感覚｜夫婦仲の秘訣は夫の忍耐｜夫からの愛は二郎系｜マツエク命｜酒がすべての源｜皆さんからのフォローが酒の肴です。

くるる

@Seina_additiona

FXと自動売買が好き📊 いろいろ試しながら運用してる良さそうなのはちゃんと残したい派日々の記録とか気づきメイン

rabirgo retweeted

@chocoha25

16 days ago

ボウルに鶏ガラ、しお、にんにくチューブ、ごま油、黒コショウと刻みネギとタコをよく和えて冷蔵庫で30分置くと言葉を失うレベルに美味い。タコの1番美味しい食べ方かもしれない。ほんとに何度でも作りたくなるよ。

10K

407K

毛利裕介｜経営戦略を実行に結びつける、開発出身の実装型コンサルタント

@rabirgo

18 days ago

詳細読んでないが冷蔵庫買い替え検討進められそう気がつけば我が家の冷蔵庫も15年選手…

西日本新聞me | 福岡ニュース

@nishinippon_dsg

18 days ago

福岡市がエアコン・冷蔵庫の購入費3分の1補助　8億901万円増額の補正予算案発表 https://t.co/5s0xqGPngF 福岡市は3日、省エネ性能の高いエアコンと冷蔵庫の購入費補助を含む計8億901万円を増額する2件の本年度一般会計補正予算案など32議案を発表した。10日開会予定の市議会定例会に提案する。

301

350

265K

rabirgo retweeted

Kenn Ejima

@kenn

19 days ago

https://t.co/EOnuKYem6n

315

491

107K

rabirgo retweeted

じゆう｜AIリモートワーク @freedom_202505

20 days ago

楽天カード不正利用40万円、全面解決までの4ヶ月 1月30日【被害発生】海外滞在中、別国の店舗で計約100万円の不正利用が発生。三井住友カード（約60万円分）は自動検知で即ブロック、実害ゼロ。楽天カード（約40万円分）はすり抜けて決済が通ってしまい、翌日利用停止へ。 2月16日【初回回答・門前払い】カード会社から「実店舗決済のため不正とは認められない。」と返信。「別国にいたため物理的に不可能、パスポートで証明できる」とメールで抗議・支払い保留を要求。 2月19日〜3月3日【無視と催促】返信に毎回2週間待たされた挙句、「偽造ではないので力になれない、身内に確認して」と所在証明は無視。やり取り中も「支払いの催促」の電話やメールが何度も届く。電話するたびにオペレーターが変わり、毎回一から説明させられ疲弊。個人交渉の限界を実感。 3月12日【消費生活センターへ駆け込み】「消費生活センター」へ相談、カード会社へ介入（直接連絡）してもらう。 3月13日【カード会社の態度が一変】介入翌日、カード会社に「専任の担当者」がつき態度が一変。支払いの保留と再調査が決定。 3月15日〜31日【警察への相談・証拠提出】担当者より「盗難紛失保険」の申請を提案され、解決まで40万円の請求はスキップ対応に。管轄の警察署へ出向き、相談実績（相談番号）を確保。パスポートコピー（顔写真・入出国スタンプ）、被害通知書など証拠書類一式を送付。 4月20日【追加尋問】カード会社より「過去に店員にカードを手渡したことがあるか」と電話確認があり、「あった」と回答。 5月7日【請求なしの連絡】担当者より「支払い請求なし（負担なし）」の電話連絡。 5月25日【完全決着】正式に「盗難紛失保険が適用され処理完了」のメールが届き、4ヶ月にわたるやり取りが終了。

777

938

393K

rabirgo retweeted

Thariq

@trq212

19 days ago

Workflows are the biggest upgrade to Claude Code’s capabilities since skills and subagents. I dove deep into it with @sidbid to figure out best practices, examples and more. I’m particularly excited about the non-technical tasks it enables for Claude Code.

179

365

993K

rabirgo retweeted

森シェフ

@yohtaro007

9 months ago

料理人がたどり着いたカオマンガイ✨ 【材料】鶏もも肉…..1枚油…..大さじ1 塩…..少々ニンニク…..1片生姜の薄切り…..2枚洗った米…..2合水…..2合分よりすこし少なめ鶏がらスープの素…..小さじ2 料理酒…..大さじ1 ネギの青い部分…..適量パクチー…..適量レモン…..少々 (香味ダレ) ごま油…..大さじ1 ニンニクのみじん切り…..10g 生姜のみじん切り…..10g ネギのみじん切り…..10cm分 A醤油…..大さじ2 　酢…..大さじ2 　砂糖…..大さじ1 【作り方】 ①フライパンに油と鶏もも肉を入れ、中火にかける。皮面がカリッと焼けたらひっくり返してニンニクと生姜を入れて香りが出るまで炒める。 ②炊飯釜に米、水、①、ネギの青い部分を入れて普通炊きにする。 ③フライパンにごま油、ニンニクのみじん切り、生姜のみじん切りを入れて香りが出るまで炒める。 ④Aを入れて、砂糖が溶けたらネギのみじん切りを加えて火を消す。(タレ完成) ⑤器にご飯と鶏肉、パクチーを盛り付けて香味ダレをかける。お好みでレモン汁を絞る。 #カオマンガイ

14K

18K

rabirgo retweeted

Anthropic

@AnthropicAI

20 days ago

Anthropic has confidentially submitted a draft S-1 registration statement to the Securities and Exchange Commission. Pending completion of SEC review, this gives us the option to pursue an initial public offering. Read more: https://t.co/onGZAhRLvD

984

22K

20M

毛利裕介｜経営戦略を実行に結びつける、開発出身の実装型コンサルタント

@rabirgo

21 days ago

#backspacefm で聴いて、やってみたいんだよな…(忘れてた) 少し仕事余裕出てきそうだからやってみよう。記録してグラフ化されて体内が想像できるようになったら生活変わりそうちなみに起床後の歯磨きは、口内菌だらけなの想像するようになって定着した (それまで起床後は歯磨きしてなかった💧)

Dr.もさり｜山本康博

@drmosari

21 days ago

https://t.co/0vIAAKmPOK

15K

11K

172

rabirgo retweeted

Dr.もさり｜山本康博

@drmosari

21 days ago

https://t.co/0vIAAKmPOK

15K

11K

rabirgo retweeted

mana｜株式会社MakeAI CEO

@MakeAI_CEO

22 days ago

これ確実に一部から袋叩きにされる覚悟で書くんだが、海外のAI研究者界隈で「日本人のプロンプトはDSPyすら知らない化石レベル」って堂々と煽ってる男がいて、最初は何言ってんだコイツとしか思ってなかったんだが、、、その男が普段使ってるChatGPT・Claude・Codexの設計を実際に見せてもらった瞬間、マジで言葉を失った。1行目から構造が完全に違ってて、日本で出回ってる「使い方」と次元が3つくらい飛んでた。今日、その全構造を5つに分解して置いていく👇

939

335K

rabirgo retweeted