1,280 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Extract billable ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes from a clinical note the way a professional coder builds the claim. Use when users say "code this encounter", "assign ICD-10 codes", "what diagnosis codes apply", "code this chart", or when turning clinical documentation into claim-ready diagnosis codes.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Assign CPT and HCPCS Level II procedure codes from clinical documentation the way a professional coder builds the claim. Use when users say "code this encounter for procedures", "what CPT codes apply", "assign HCPCS codes", "code this op note", or when turning visit notes or operative reports into claim-ready procedure codes.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when the user wants to verify paper claims against code or data, audit numerical accuracy, check formula-code alignment, or validate citation accuracy. Triggers on phrases like "verify claims", "check numbers", "do the numbers match", "formula vs code", "audit the paper", or "cross-check results".
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Runs verification commands and confirms output before success claims. Use before claiming work done or committing or PRs.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Structured fact-checking workflow. Use when verifying claims for publication, rating claims, or setting pre-publication checks.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Evaluating scientific evidence and claims. Covers study design hierarchy (RCT to expert opinion), effect sizes (OR, RR, NNT, Cohen's d), confounding, p-value vs clinical significance, GRADE quality assessment, reproducibility, and bias types (selection, information, confounding, reporting). Use when reading a paper or assessing claims.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Design, audit, and strengthen experimental validation for IEEE manuscripts using routed claim-evidence checks. Use when planning experiments, selecting baselines, designing ablations, choosing metrics, checking fairness, adding robustness tests, explaining results, analyzing complexity, building claim-to-evidence matrices, or responding to reviewer concerns about insufficient experiments.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Background legal and regulatory context for the shinkoku tax filing plugin. Contains the standard disclaimer about the scope of tax information provided, the relationship to the Tax Accountant Act (税理士法), and tool limitations. This skill is not user-invocable — Claude loads it automatically when generating tax-related responses that require a disclaimer.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Build a Seedance 2.0 brand, product, website, app, shop, or personal-project promo from verified assets and claims. Use when the user needs a truthful 4–15 second reel with a clear hook, product proof, controlled typography, camera, sound, CTA, and provenance-aware asset roles; not for inventing claims or imitating unavailable brand marks.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Verifies factual claims in documents using web search and official sources, then proposes corrections with user confirmation. Use when the user asks to fact-check, verify information, validate claims, check accuracy, or update outdated information in documents. Supports AI model specs, technical documentation, statistics, and general factual statements.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Semi-automated fact-checking, source credibility evaluation, misinformation detection, prebunking, and evidence-ledger based claim verification. Use when a user asks to verify a claim, article, social post, screenshot, URL, quote, data point, compare sources, detect manipulation, evaluate source reliability, or generate an HTML fact-check card/share-safe correction. Supports text, URLs, screenshots/images, two-source comparison, and topic-level prebunking in Bulgarian, English, Russian, EU policy, health, science, and geopolitical contexts. Trigger phrases: "is this true?", "is this fake?", "fact check this", "compare these sources", "проверка на факти", "истина ли е", "дезинформация ли е", "сравни тези източници".
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Edits existing marketing copy in ordered passes (structure, claims, sentences, consistency, proof) and returns the edited text with a change log and a list of questions for the author. Flags claims that need evidence instead of inventing proof, and keeps the writer's voice. Use when someone says "edit this copy", "proofread this page", "tighten this", "polish this email", "review my landing page copy", "make this clearer", "check this before we publish", or asks for copy feedback on a page, ad, email or product description.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when drafting patent applications, writing claims, analyzing prior art, or responding to office actions - covers USPTO practice, claim strategies, and specification requirementsUse when ", " mentioned.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Keeps specification documents and code in agreement. Audit mode finds every divergence when an implementation is claimed complete; sync mode detects spec drift in staged changes and updates the spec after user approval, so each commit is a reconciled snapshot of spec, tests, and code. Use when an implementation is claimed complete against a spec, before committing changes that may drift from the spec, or after approving decisions that must flow back into it.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Synthesize the single strongest EVIDENCE-BOUND reviewer case to reject a paper, built ONLY from the evidence ledger (claims.json) + the other auditors' confirmed findings — never free-floating LLM critique. Two fresh cross-model codex threads: an attack writes the ~200-word rejection paragraph (every accusation tagged to an existing claim_id/finding_id), a defense decomposes it and rules each point against the anchored evidence. MEMO-ONLY: emits adversarial-case-builder.memo.md (fed to the adjudicator via --memo) and carries NO verdict weight — tools/adjudicate_findings.py lists it in ZERO_WEIGHT_SKILLS and caps it at info. Honest-null allowed (the paper may survive). Run LAST. Detect-only. Adapted from ARIS kill-argument. Triggers: "adversarial case", "strongest objection", "rejection memo", "kill argument", "最强拒稿点".
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Audit whether a paper's baseline comparisons are COMPLETE, FAIR, and SIGNIFICANT: a required recent SOTA baseline is missing while 'best/SOTA' is claimed (HP-MISSING-BASELINE); a baseline is undertuned / given less compute-tuning-data, run at a mismatched config, or the equal-budget ablation-as-baseline is absent (HP-WEAK-BASELINE); 'outperforms' is asserted over overlapping error bars or with no variance/seeds (HP-SIG-OVERLAP); and a cross-row 'improves over baseline by X%' is arithmetically wrong (HP-DELTA-ERROR, cross-row form only). A versioned per-domain baseline profile + a live leaderboard/recency search are assembled by the EXECUTOR as structured facts; a fresh cross-model reviewer (gpt-5.6-sol xhigh, read-only, fresh thread per dimension) PROPOSES findings, each span-anchored to a ledger claim_id; tools/adjudicate_findings.py DECIDES the verdict. Works at L0 (stated comparisons) and deepens at L2 (configs/result files). A completeness question it cannot settle internally becomes needs_external_check, never a guessed missing baseline. Emits baseline-comparison-audit.findings.json; computes NO verdict. Detect-only. Triggers: "baseline audit", "missing baselines", "is the comparison fair", "weak baseline", "baseline 误报", "SOTA earned?".
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Audit whether a paper's EVALUATION DESIGN actually measures what it claims and whether its reporting is complete — the validity layer family D (experiment-forensics) cannot reach. Three patterns: train/test leakage means the reported score may not measure generalization (HP-EVAL-LEAKAGE — adopts the Kapoor & Narayanan 8-type / 3-category leakage taxonomy; the illegitimate-proxy / sampling-bias / pretraining-contamination subtypes hand off as needs_external_check, naming but NEVER running Oren-2023 exchangeability / Shi-2023 Min-K% / Golchin-2023 Time-Travel / BIG-bench canary); a load-bearing LLM judge is conflicted (same model/family as a compared system) or unvalidated (no human-agreement, no bias control) (HP-JUDGE-VALIDITY); a declared condition/metric is dropped or switched to favor the method, or 'best' is chosen with no held-out set (HP-SELECTIVE-REPORTING). Verdict-bearing at L0/L1 from the DESCRIBED protocol — NOT repo-gated like experiment-forensics; L2 only CONFIRMS against split/preprocessing/result files. A fresh cross-model reviewer (gpt-5.6-sol xhigh, read-only, fresh thread per pass) PROPOSES findings, each span-anchored to a ledger claim_id; tools/adjudicate_findings.py DECIDES the verdict. Leakage and under-reporting are usually HONEST methodological errors — every finding describes a discrepancy to CHECK, never an accusation. An LLM generating GROUND-TRUTH labels is HP-FAKE-GT (experiment-forensics) — routed there, not here. Emits eval-design-forensics.findings.json; computes NO verdict. Detect-only. Triggers: "eval design audit", "evaluation validity", "train/test leakage", "data leakage", "is the score measuring generalization", "LLM judge bias", "is the judge validated", "selective reporting", "cherry-picked results", "评估设计审计", "评测有效性", "数据泄漏", "训练测试集泄漏", "裁判模型有没有验证", "选择性报告".
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Generate navigable semantic maps from PDF documents. Extracts section structure via font analysis, then runs LLM extraction per section for claims, symbols, and dependencies — all page-anchored. Produces _MAP.md (progressive disclosure), .symbols.json (definition index), .anchors.json (claim references), and a _USAGE.md snippet for CLAUDE.md. Use when analyzing papers, specs, or legal docs; when asked to "map this document", "index this PDF", "what does this paper say"; or when a coding agent needs grounded reference material from a PDF source. Analogous to tree-sitting but for prose documents.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Suede-affiliated Amazon money-recovery audit for restocking fees, short or denied refunds, and Amazon-billed subscriptions. Use when the user mentions a restocking fee, a short or denied Amazon refund, or a forgotten Prime Video Channel, Audible, Kindle Unlimited, or Prime charge, or asks whether Amazon still owes or bills them. Read-only discovery; no chat, cancellation, or dispute without the account owner's per-item confirmation, and never a promise of recovery. Requires an authenticated Claude in Chrome session. NOT FOR: bank chargebacks, marketplace A-to-z seller claims, price-protection claims, or subscriptions billed outside Amazon (use subscription-recovery).
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Verify before claiming completion. No claims without fresh verification evidence. Use before marking work done.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Find, rank, and safely remove accidental codebase complexity by proving real consumers, dynamic entrypoints, compatibility obligations, duplicate representations, speculative surfaces, and lifecycle ownership. Use when asked to simplify or clean up a repository, reclaim code entropy, reduce over-engineering or redundancy, find deletion candidates, collapse duplicate state/APIs, remove dead or added-then-abandoned code beyond static-tool output, or implement an evidence-backed simplification pass in any language or stack. Also trigger for 代码化简、熵回收、删代码、清理冗余、收敛抽象、去除过度设计. Do not use as a performance audit unless simplification is the stated goal.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when asked to prove, disprove, investigate, or find evidence for a claim about people, concepts, ideas, or their relationships. Also use when asked to explore connections, find who influenced what, trace how ideas developed, or answer questions that require reasoning over multiple linked notes.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。