Results for “proposal”

Structured design intake for non-trivial tasks. Asks clarifying questions and produces a design proposal.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Use when a set of sources, dossiers, graph records, or experiment notes must be synthesized into project understanding, evidence pressure, uncertainty, and optional strict-review graph proposals.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Use when a project-local paper dossier should produce graph delta JSON proposals and run through the human-gated delta loop.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Improve an existing skill or repository through isolated proposals, reproducible evaluation and evidence-based acceptance. Use for self-evolve or skill improvement.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Use when asked to review a plan, challenge a proposal, run a CEO review, poke holes in an approach, think bigger about scope, or decide whether to expand or reduce the plan.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Create or evaluate an architecture decision record (ADR). Use when choosing between technologies (e.g., Kafka vs SQS), documenting a design decision with trade-offs and consequences, reviewing a system design proposal, or designing a new component from requirements and constraints.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Distinguishing aims, objectives, hypotheses, and milestones — the hierarchy that keeps proposals logically tight.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Write structured Requests for Proposal (RFP) or Requests for Quotation (RFQ) aligned with ISO 20400 sustainable procurement principles. Cover scope, technical requirements, evaluation methodology, and commercial terms. Use when sourcing vendors, services, or equipment.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Summarize document-heavy inputs such as memos, policies, PDFs, research notes, proposals, and multi-document packets. Use when users need key points, obligations, questions, and action implications from documents.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Inspect or exercise the paused gaia curate orchestration scaffold for one source URL. The command currently persists an INITIALIZED run ledger and reports status; its 25 named workflow states and transition methods are a design skeleton, not an implemented automated curation or merge pipeline. Use only for scaffold development, status inspection, or dry-run contract work. For live curation, use gaia-full-pipeline or gaia-consult. Trigger phrases: "/gaia-quick-curate", "inspect gaia curate", "curate scaffold", "quick curate status". For batch/multi-page runs use gaia-curate-dynamic; for crawler branches use gaia-bot-curate; for pending intake proposals use gaia-draft-curate.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Orchestrate a whole-registry sweep of Gaia — fan out 13 parallel audit agents across every skill, run adversarial verification, surface Semantic Fusion candidates, propose new generic skill references, and synthesize a publish-ready HTML report under docs/meta/reports/. Use this skill for broad, systemic analysis across many skills at once: "run a meta sweep", "sweep the meta", "full meta audit", "audit the whole registry against META.md", "widespread nomenclature issues", "find all skills missing a GitHub link", "produce a meta report", "check for evidence type mismatches across the registry", "find skills that document a third-party tool with no attribution", or explicitly types /gaia-meta-sweep. This is the registry-wide macro companion to /gaia-meta-audit (a prioritized queue, single-pass) and /gaia-audit (fixes one skill). Use it when you need the full surface — 13 audit dimensions, adversarial verification, fusion proposals, and a durable findings artifact — not just a queue.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Audit essays, reports, literature reviews, dissertations, proposals, and source-backed assignments for high-score academic quality. Use when the user asks whether a paper can get a high grade, wants teacher/rubric feedback addressed, needs a pre-submission review, or needs checks for strict rubric compliance, academic standards, prompt/rubric alignment, argument quality, comparative analysis, evidence hierarchy, table/figure integration, citation specificity, conclusion strength, academic language, source-claim integrity, or evidence boundaries.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Propose a new change with all artifacts generated in one step. Use when the user wants to quickly describe what they want to build and get a complete proposal with design, specs, and tasks ready for implementation.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Provide constructive, evidence-based research mentoring feedback on student manuscripts, proposals, analyses, code, figures, and presentations. Use for advisor-style review that teaches the next improvement without impersonating an advisor or making unsupported scientific judgments.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Apply source-aware mechanical-engineering judgment to research, analysis, coding, writing, teaching, research identity, and release work. Use for thermal-fluid systems, heat transfer, fluid mechanics, thermodynamics, HVAC, energy systems, turbomachinery, piping, multiphase flow, experiments, correlations, CFD, reduced-order models, AI/ML, uncertainty, engineering datasets, literature reviews, citations, manuscripts, reviewer revisions, Overleaf packages, figures, proposals, research software, reproducibility, public releases, engineering teaching materials, or a research-project logo and visual identity.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Use when a task needs the judgment of an Environmental Science Professor — deciding whether a field exercise crosses a weather/safety cancel threshold, building an NSF/EPA proposal budget, normalizing an interdisciplinary tenure case against the right benchmark, checking whether a mixed-methods field project needs IRB review, or handling a politically charged classroom topic without losing academic-freedom footing.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Use when a task needs the judgment of a Computer and Information Research Scientist — designing an ablation to attribute an empirical gain, budgeting an NSF CISE proposal against page and content limits, deciding what reproducibility artifacts to release with a paper, screening a draft for mathiness or terminology misuse, or scoping the consent/ethics review needed before running an experiment on real users.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Use when a task needs the judgment of a climate change policy analyst — evaluating a proposed emissions rule's cost-benefit case, comparing carbon-pricing instruments (tax vs. cap-and-trade), drafting regulatory comment letters or legislative issue briefs, or assessing whether a climate proposal survives legal/political feasibility review.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Use when a task needs the judgment of an astronomer — calculating exposure time or signal-to-noise for a target, writing the feasibility math for a telescope-time proposal, reducing photometric or spectroscopic data, distinguishing a systematic error floor from statistical noise, or reviewing an observational result for calibration or upper-limit red flags.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Use when a task needs the judgment of a professional author — drafting or structurally revising a novel or narrative-nonfiction manuscript, writing a query letter or book proposal, evaluating a publishing contract's royalty and rights terms, or diagnosing why a manuscript is getting rejected.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Use when a task needs the judgment of a licensed Architect — programming a building's spatial/functional requirements against a budget, developing a design concept against a zoning/code envelope, evaluating a fee proposal or scope-creep request, resolving a code-compliance conflict between disciplines, or working through a construction-phase change order's cost and schedule impact.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Generate comprehensive OpenSpec specifications directly from the current project state. Use when the user wants to create or populate main specs by analyzing existing code, documentation, AGENTS.md, GitHub issues, and pull requests — without going through the change/proposal workflow. Ideal for bootstrapping specs on a project that already has working code but no specs yet, or for refreshing specs to match the current implementation.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Propose a new OpenSpec change with all artifacts generated in one step. Use when the user wants to quickly describe what they want to build and get a complete proposal with design, specs, and tasks ready for implementation. Also use when the user says "openspec propose" or "opsx propose".

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Review Circuit Weaver's exhaustive placement proposal and apply approved SVG coordinates to a real electrically annotated KiCad PCB. Use after schematic generation for placement optimization, official-reference review, interactive SVG editing, strict reference reconciliation, and PCB placement handoff. Do not treat review artifacts as fabrication data.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.