397건 · 관련도순
Have Claude and GPT critique each other's answers, revise their positions, and work toward a combined response. Choose the number of rounds and see what changed, where they agree, and which disagreements remain.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.
Review a Figma design, screenshot, or written description for usability, visual hierarchy, consistency, and accessibility. Receive specific findings, explanations, and prioritized improvements, with feedback tailored to the design stage and intended users.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.
Review a product experience by walking through its steps and capturing screenshots. Produces an illustrated assessment of usability, design, and accessibility risks, with findings tied to specific screens and clear limits on what was checked.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.
Compares a prototype’s rendered screens with its source design to find differences in typography, spacing, colors, images, and text. Produces prioritized fixes and records visual evidence from follow-up checks before handoff.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.
Routes web visualization work to suitable specialist skills, from chart selection and critique to maps, dashboards, and software diagrams. Helps plan readable views, mobile interactions, accessible controls, shareable state, exports, and testing around the question the data should answer.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.
Stress-test an idea, plan, or proposal through focused critique. The skill examines assumptions, opposing arguments, failure scenarios, attacks, or evidence, then uses your responses to refine the position and identify unresolved trade-offs and risky assumptions.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.
Evaluate pages and components for usability, visual hierarchy, clarity, and emotional tone. Produce a score out of 40, examine tasks from relevant user perspectives, and prioritize concrete improvements around the user's goals and constraints.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.
Review academic manuscripts for argument quality, causal evidence, statistical methods, citations, and presentation. Receive a structured report with strengths, major concerns, suggested improvements, and likely referee objections tied to specific parts of the paper.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.
Simulate academic peer review through five reviewer roles tailored to the paper's field. Receive separate critiques, an editorial decision, and a prioritized revision roadmap, or check whether a revised manuscript addresses earlier comments.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.
LQF Machine Learning Expert Guide - Routed skill for ML/Statistical Modeling with Critical Discussion Mode. Triggers on: machine learning, modeling, prediction, training, classification, regression, clustering, deep learning, neural network, model evaluation, feature engineering, hyperparameter tuning, overfitting, underfitting, baseline, ablation study, critique my approach, review my model, is this a good idea, should I use, what's wrong with, evaluate my solution, challenge my assumptions, discuss my approach Engages in critical discussion with minimum 3 rounds of iterative refinement. Challenges both user proposals and own suggestions with fact-based critique. Demands evidence and baselines before accepting solutions.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Critique a rendered screen's affordances — what looks clickable, state visibility, CTA clarity, and action discoverability. Use when reviewing an existing screen. For sizing and positioning targets in new work, use `fitts-law` (interaction-design).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Critique a rendered screen against mood.md, voice.md, and tokens.md. Use when those brand files exist and you are checking compliance. For defining the visual language itself, use `illustration-style` (ui-design).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Critique a rendered screen's density — cognitive load, content prioritisation, scanning patterns, and progressive disclosure. Use when a screen feels overwhelming. For the underlying choice-count principle, use `hicks-law` (interaction-design).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Critique a rendered screen's colour — contrast ratios, palette coherence, and semantic meaning. Use when reviewing one screen. For a product-wide WCAG audit use `accessibility-audit` (design-systems); for building the palette use `color-system` (ui-design).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Critique a rendered screen's typography — scale usage, readability, consistency, and token compliance. Use when reviewing type on a screen. For defining the scale itself, use `typography-scale` (ui-design).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Critique a rendered screen's hierarchy — entry point, eye flow, weight distribution, and emphasis. Use when attention lands in the wrong place. For establishing hierarchy in new work, use `visual-hierarchy` (ui-design).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Establish hierarchy through size, weight, colour, spacing, and position so the eye lands in the intended order. Use when composing new work. For judging an existing screen, use `critique-visual-hierarchy` (visual-critique).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Create a modular type scale with size, weight, and line-height relationships. Use when establishing typographic structure. For line length only use `readable-measure`; for judging type on an existing screen use `critique-typography` (visual-critique).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Facilitate a structured team critique — framing, feedback rules, and actionable outcomes. Use when running a session with people in the room. For a solo expert review, use `heuristic-evaluation` (prototyping-testing).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Adversarial design critique of the current work — render it, look at it, and argue for rejection. Run after the gates are green, never instead of them.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
A medical-research-native literature reading skill for users with clinical, bioinformatics, translational, and basic experimental backgrounds. Use this skill whenever a user wants to read, analyze, critique, or interpret a medical or scientific paper — whether they provide a PDF, abstract, DOI, PMID, or just a title. Triggers include requests like \"analyze this paper\", \"critique this study\", \"is this a strong paper?\", \"give me similar studies\", \"prepare me for journal club\", \"help me understand this bioinformatics paper\", \"what are the weaknesses here?\", or \"turn this into a mind map\". Also activate for any downstream deliverables such as journal club kits, comparison tables, PI decision briefs, replication starters, or follow-up experiment designs. Do NOT treat as a generic summarizer — this skill performs structured evidence-type classification, track-specific critical appraisal, interpretation-boundary judgment, and research-grade follow-up generation.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Build premium, realistic soundtracks for code-made videos and animations from real licensed recordings - launch films, product and feature videos, UI walkthroughs, logo stings, explainers, trailers and animated shorts made with Remotion, HyperFrames, three.js, GSAP or any renderer. Use this whenever a video or animation needs sound design, SFX, foley, ambience, music, a soundtrack, a score, UI click / whoosh / riser / impact / logo-sting sounds, or a music edit to picture; whenever a synthesized or "random" sounding soundtrack must be replaced with real recordings; or when the user asks to source, license, credit, mix, master, critique or mux audio for a film. It covers cue lists from the picture, sourcing from Freesound / Mixkit / composer libraries with licence checks, a music edit at bar lines, a JSON sound design rendered by a deterministic mixer, measured QA (clicks, masking, harshness, sync, loudness) plus earshot listening, a multi-agent critique, mastering, credits and the mux.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Run one independent Council critique against engagement-report research evidence. Use as the manual separate-session fallback when independent critic agents are unavailable.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Break large features into independently verifiable, human-reviewable slices under a feature directory in specs/. Use for risky or multi-step feature work that needs upfront questioning, API seams, browser-playable checkpoints, HTML visualizations, screenshot gates, staged implementation plans, recursive fog-of-war reslicing, or proactive research into reference implementations/best practices before slicing. Pairs with your project's verification harness and screenshot gates (the browser checkpoints), [refactor-clean](../refactor-clean/SKILL.md) (review the materialized spec so the plan describes one-owner architecture, not the feature bolted on), [screenshot-critique](../../visual/screenshot-critique/SKILL.md) and [compare-screenshots](../../visual/compare-screenshots/SKILL.md) (the visual gates), and a code-review pass (audit each slice before it lands).
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.