「scoring」の検索結果

Screen existing small-molecule libraries with Boltz. Use when docking, scoring, or ranking a supplied SMILES or compound library against a target; also returns free Tier-1 ADME/ADMET (solubility, permeability, lipophilicity/logD) per molecule. Not for de novo molecule design, one-off docking, or ADME on bare SMILES with no target (use boltz-small-molecule-adme).

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。

Choose a prioritization framework based on stage, team context, and stakeholder needs. Use when deciding between RICE, ICE, value/effort, or another scoring approach.

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。

Builds a numbered, categorized concept catalogue from the talk summary and timeline, scoring each concept HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW for talk potential with optional repo enrichment. Use when you need a structured inventory of concepts before choosing a talk angle, or when assessing which ideas have the strongest presentation potential.

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。

Codebase health audit scoring 7 categories with progression plan

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。

This skill should be used when the user wants to "run an evaluation", "evaluate my agent", "evaluate my ADK agent", "write an eval dataset", "analyze eval failures", "compare eval results", "optimize agent", or needs guidance on the Gemini platform eval methodology and the Quality Flywheel. Covers eval metrics, dataset schema, LLM-as-judge scoring, and common failure causes. Applies to any agents-cli project, whatever framework the agent is written in. Do NOT use for agent API code patterns (ADK: use google-agents-cli-adk-code), deployment (use google-agents-cli-deploy), or project scaffolding (use google-agents-cli-scaffold).

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。

Evaluate design from a UX perspective, assessing visual hierarchy, information architecture, emotional resonance, cognitive load, and overall quality with quantitative scoring, persona-based testing, and actionable feedback. Use when the user asks to review, critique, evaluate, or give feedback on a design or component.

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。

Bug bounty report writing for H1/Bugcrowd/Intigriti/Immunefi — report templates, human tone guidelines, impact-first writing, CVSS 3.1 scoring, title formula, impact statement formula, severity decision guide, downgrade counters, pre-submit checklist. Use after validating a finding and before submitting. Never use "could potentially" — prove it or don't report.

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。

The way to answer "how are my production AI agents doing?" and to run the team's agent-observability deployment — reach for it even on casual phrasing that names no tool. Trigger when the user wants to: • inspect agent telemetry — did agents error/fail/go flaky; sessions, events, latency, token usage, slowest models; eval/quality scores and whether quality dropped; • operate the deployment — ack/assign/resolve/mute/dismiss issues (alerts, reports, and audit findings) with notes; run and triage audits; see who has access and change roles (e.g. read-only); create or scope API keys (e.g. a push-only CI key); change settings; run saved or ad-hoc ClickHouse queries. Served by the `fp` CLI against FailproofAI Cloud. NOT for writing or designing an evaluator service / scoring logic (that's `agenteye-evaluator`), adding SDK/instrumentation to your app (that's `failproofai-sdk`, imported as `failproofai_sdk`), debugging the collector/daemon, or unrelated dev work (why a build/CI run failed, rotating non-FailproofAI Cloud secrets).

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。

Evaluate Agent Skill design quality against official specifications and best practices. Use when reviewing, auditing, or improving SKILL.md files and skill packages. Provides multi-dimensional scoring and actionable improvement suggestions.

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。

Compare options with weighted scoring, pros and cons, pre-mortems, opportunity costs, and ICE prioritization. Use when a user wants to reason through a choice, expose assumptions, or rank alternatives.

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。

Bug bounty report writing for H1/Bugcrowd/Intigriti/Immunefi — report templates, human tone guidelines, impact-first writing, CVSS 3.1 scoring, title formula, impact statement formula, severity decision guide, downgrade counters, pre-submit checklist. Validation gates and the submittability/always-rejected decision are owned by triage-validation; this skill owns the written report itself (templates, tone, formulas). Use after validating a finding and before submitting. Never use "could potentially" — prove it or don't report.

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。

Operational arsenal for authorized external red-team and bug-bounty recon. Concrete probes, wordlists, regexes, dorks, curl one-liners for: subdomain enum, GraphQL/Swagger/REST discovery, identity fabric (Entra/Okta/ADFS/Google/SAML/M365 deep — Teams/SharePoint/OneDrive), cloud bucket enum (S3/GCS/Azure), CDN/WAF bypass, origin discovery, vendor fingerprinting (Citrix/F5/Pulse/Fortinet/PaloAlto/Cisco/VMware), CI/CD exposure, 48-pattern secret-scan catalog (AWS/GCP/GitHub/Stripe/Slack/Anthropic/OpenAI/Atlassian/DataDog/npm/PyPI), Postman workspaces, breach correlation (HudsonRock/HIBP/DeHashed/IntelX), TLS/JA3 audit, certificate transparency, JS endpoint extraction, package registry leaks, mobile/APK recon, sat imagery, sector-specific recon (healthcare DICOM, finance SWIFT, ICS/SCADA Modbus/BACnet). Detail content in 15 modular reference files, loaded on demand. Use for any authorized recon: scoping, asset discovery, attack-path mapping, secret triage, severity scoring.

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。

Biohub ESMFold2 / ESMFold2-Fast all-atom co-folding (Candido et al. 2026, github.com/Biohub/esm). Single-sequence and MSA modes; protein, DNA, RNA, ligand (CCD/SMILES), modified residues. FoldBench Ab-Ag 50-55%, PPI 70-77% DockQ-pass. Also covers the ESMC-{300M,600M,6B} protein language models from the same release: masked-LM logits, hidden states, mutation scoring, contact prediction, and the SAE interpretability head. MIT-licensed weights on HuggingFace org `biohub`. Use this skill when: (1) Predicting complex structures with single-sequence input, (2) Validating designed binders with ESMFold2-Fast, (3) Running ESMFold2 with MSA input, (4) Getting ESMC embeddings or per-residue mutation scores, (5) Choosing kernel backend and sampling-step settings for paper-faithful throughput.

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。

Predict small-molecule binding poses with DiffDock-L (Corso et al. 2023/2024, github.com/gcorso/DiffDock) — blind diffusion docking that places a ligand into a protein pocket without a predefined search box and ranks the samples with a learned confidence model. Reach for this skill to dock a SMILES or SDF against a PDB, to generate ranked 3D poses for a small fragment library, or to get a starting pose for downstream rescoring. DiffDock predicts geometry, not affinity.

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。

Predict genome-wide functional tracks (RNA-seq, CAGE, DNase, ChIP) from DNA sequence with Borzoi. Use this skill when: (1) Scoring the regulatory effect of a variant on expression/accessibility, (2) Generating predicted coverage tracks for a locus, (3) Prioritising non-coding variants by predicted track delta.

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。

Embed proteins with Meta AI's ESM-2 (`fair-esm` package). Use this skill when: (1) Extracting per-residue or per-sequence embeddings for downstream ML, (2) Masked-LM likelihood / mutation effect scoring, (3) Contact prediction from a sequence.

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。

Two-stage paper screening - abstract scoring then deep dive for specific data extraction

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。

Extract the full design language from any website URL. Produces 8 output files including AI-optimized markdown, visual HTML preview, Tailwind config, React theme, shadcn/ui theme, Figma variables, W3C design tokens, and CSS variables. Also runs WCAG accessibility scoring. Use when user says 'extract design', 'get design system', 'design language', 'design tokens', 'what colors/fonts does this site use', or '/extract-design'.

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。

Multi-AI validation, scoring, and review using available external providers (Double Diamond Deliver phase)

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。

Systematically evaluate scholarly work using the ScholarEval framework, providing structured assessment across research quality dimensions including problem formulation, methodology, analysis, and writing with quantitative scoring and actionable feedback.

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 manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation. Use when writing formal peer reviews with specific criteria methodology assessment, statistical validity, reporting standards compliance (CONSORT/STROBE), and constructive feedback. Best for actual review writing, manuscript revision. For evaluating claims/evidence quality use scientific-critical-thinking; for quantitative scoring frameworks use scholar-evaluation.

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。

Systematically evaluate scholarly work using the ScholarEval framework, providing structured assessment across research quality dimensions including problem formulation, methodology, analysis, and writing with quantitative scoring and actionable feedback.

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 manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation. Use when writing formal peer reviews with specific criteria methodology assessment, statistical validity, reporting standards compliance (CONSORT/STROBE), and constructive feedback. Best for actual review writing, manuscript revision. For evaluating claims/evidence quality use scientific-critical-thinking; for quantitative scoring frameworks use scholar-evaluation.

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。

MiCA compliance evidence and stablecoin risk scoring. Use when the user asks about stablecoin compliance, MiCA status, peg stability, or needs verifiable evidence for audit workflows.

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。