「ci」の検索結果

Write, validate, and (optionally) execute an NQL query against a Narrative dataset. Drafts the query from the user's question, runs `narrative_nql_validate` until it compiles, explains the query in plain English, and only runs it on explicit approval (or when invoked with `--run`). Use when: "write an NQL query for X", "query this dataset", "validate this NQL", "run NQL against dataset <id>", "how many rows match Y", "show me the top N records from <dataset>". (narrative-common)

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。

Translate a fuzzy analytical question into a rigorous investigation plan. Interrogates the ask, grounds the plan in the available data dictionary, applies analytical best practices, and produces a structured brief of query specifications for a downstream query-writing skill. Plans, does not write SQL. Use when: "why did X drop", "is there a relationship between A and B", "who are our highest-value customers", "what's driving the change in Y", "investigate this trend", "design an analysis for", "scope this analytical question". (narrative-common)

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。

設計と実装を「最小で正確」に進め、差分思考で品質と速度を両立する。設計の溶け込み（責務不明/重複/暫定対応）を防ぎ、レビュー可能な変更へ落とし込むときに使う。

制度・規約・審査基準・手続き・料金・法令を調べるときに、公式一次情報を最優先し、体験談やブログを結論の根拠にしないための判断軸。ストア審査要件、アカウント登録・種別変更、サブスクの解約・返金、外部サービスの利用規約や料金プラン、税務・法務の手続き、「〜できますか」という可否の問いで使う。費用が発生する手順や不可逆な手続きを提案する前には必ず適用する。

ディズニーの12原則とジブリ的自然運動をベースに、UIアニメーションの「なぜ動かすか」「どう動かすか」を判断する。アニメーション/モーション/トランジション設計の相談で、ツール非依存の概念的判断軸として使う。

ego-browser (ego-lite) is a Chromium-based browser that gives AI agents a CLI-accessible Node.js runtime for driving a real browser. Use this skill whenever the user needs to interact with a website opening pages, filling forms, clicking buttons, taking screenshots, extracting page data, testing web apps, logging into sites, automating browser operations, or any other browser automation task. Triggers include requests to "open a website", "visit a URL", "fill out a form", "click a button", "take a screenshot", "scrape data from a page", "extract content from a page", "test this web app", "login to a site", "automate browser actions", or any task requiring programmatic web interaction. Also used for exploratory testing, dogfooding, QA, bug hunting, or reviewing app quality. Prefer ego-browser over any built-in browser automation, web fetch, or other web tools.

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 a tested web agent's real behavior from its recorded Pi or Codex session and selected screenshots before scoring. The judge prompt provides absolute artifact paths; use targeted queries to compare actual outputs, errors, and the final answer with the recorded behavior, then return only the verdict JSON. Only for ego-bench judging—never to drive a browser or rerun the agent.

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 standardized metrics across multiple ego-benchmark-harness runs by recalculating them from tasks.jsonl and session JSONL, never from HTML reports. Covers overall aggregates (success rate/average score), Odysseys per-rubric pass rates, duration distributions (avg/p50/p90/max), turns/tools/cost, error and exception counts, per-task success matrices, helper distributions, and the share of DOM operations. Use whenever users ask to compare data or metrics across runs, calculate aggregate/Odysseys/duration/turn/error/helper metrics, inspect differences among runs, or compare multiple rwb/real-world-bench runs. Use pi-session-analyzer instead for deep forensic analysis of why an individual task was slow or failed.

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。

Analyze Codex provider rollout JSONL and ego-benchmark-harness run artifacts to identify slow or failed individual tasks, tool retries, token/cost anomalies, and differences in agent execution paths. Use when users ask to analyze a Codex session or rollout, explain why a Codex task was slow or failed, inspect a Codex provider execution trace, compare Codex runs, count function_call or tool output events, or investigate agent-home/.codex/sessions.

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。

Export Codex rollout/session JSONL as a self-contained HTML report that can be opened offline. Use when a user provides a complete session file path or Codex session ID, or asks to export a Codex session to HTML, generate a session report, or convert a rollout to HTML. Supports exact full-ID lookup in the CODEX_HOME sessions and archived_sessions directories.

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。

Analyze pi (coding-agent) session JSONL and ego-benchmark-harness run artifacts to explain slow or failed individual tasks, compare execution-path differences between agents or browser tools, and count tool calls and error types. Use this skill whenever users ask to analyze a pi session, explain why a task was slow or failed, compare two runs, investigate an error, locate the session corresponding to tasks.jsonl, inspect an agent execution path, count tool calls, analyze a run ID, or perform any forensic or retrospective analysis of JSONL under ~/.pi/agent/sessions/ or agent-home/.pi/agent/sessions/.

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。

Architecture design and governance protocol for system structure, boundaries, contracts, APIs, schemas, migrations, rewrites, and long-lived codebase health. Use when designing or reviewing architecture, planning structural refactors or migrations, governing tech debt, or containing rewrite risk. Keeps the load-bearing spine small, owned, checked, and deletable over time.

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。

Author or expand browser-agent benchmark tasks in data/real_world_bench.json (Odysseys schema, per-rubric graded). Use when creating, adding, or expanding real-world browser tasks, writing rubrics, or picking bot-friendly sites — every task MUST be verified runnable through ego-browser before it is written.

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。

Reconstructed reference notes on US FAA approval guidance for airborne software and airborne electronic hardware, built from four public-domain sources (FAA Order 8110.49A, AC 20-115D, AC 20-152A, AC 00-69; documents dated 2017-07-21 to 2022-10-07, pinned 2026-10-12). Use for how FAA certification staff plan and conduct software reviews (certification liaison, desk versus on-site review, review planning agreements), how the level of FAA involvement (LOI) is picked and scored with the Appendix A worksheets, how software conformity inspection works (software part and installation conformity, ASE and ASI tasks, Form 8120-10), what AC 20-115D recognizes and how DO-178B processes and tool qualification transition to DO-178C/DO-330 (supplements, FLS, UMS, legacy software changes), and what AC 20-152A adds for airborne electronic hardware (simple versus complex custom devices, robustness and HDL code coverage, tool assessment, previously developed hardware, COTS IP, COTS devices, circuit board assemblies), and what AC 00-69 adds as best practices for change impact analysis, data and control coupling, and design-level error handling (best practices, not guidance and not a means of compliance). SCOPE LIMITS: FAA guidance only, and guidance is not regulation (ACs are acceptable means, not the only means); no RTCA DO-178C or DO-254, EUROCAE ED-12C or ED-80, supplement, or SAE ARP text, which are copyrighted and named only (see the avionics-signpost pack); no AC 00-72 (named, not packed); no DO-178C software-level objective tables; no EASA AMC 20-115D or AMC 20-152A content (use easa-rules); reflects the pinned source dates, not later FAA actions; synthesized reference notes, not legal advice and not a substitute for the source documents. LICENCE: Public Domain (US Government work, 17 U.S.C. 105).

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。

Reconstructed reference notes on US FDA medical-device software regulation, built from seven public-domain FDA sources (the QMSR final rule 89 FR 7496, FDA device software guidance documents, and the eSTAR program page; pinned 2026-10-12). Use for regulatory pathways and premarket submissions (510(k), De Novo, PMA, eSTAR), premarket software documentation levels (Basic or Enhanced), software validation and Computer Software Assurance, the Quality Management System Regulation (QMSR, 21 CFR 820), medical-device cybersecurity (secure product development, SBOMs, FD&C Act section 524B, labelling), clinical decision support boundaries, off-the-shelf software, MDDS and other software-function scope questions, and the 510(k) software-change trigger. SCOPE LIMITS: US FDA device regulation only; no EU MDR or UKCA content (see `med-device-eu`); no ISO 13485, ISO 14971, or IEC 62304 text, which are named and summarized only as FDA obligations; no drug, biologic, or combination-product rules; reflects the pinned source dates, not later FDA actions; synthesized reference notes, not legal advice and not a substitute for the guidance documents. LICENCE: Public Domain (US Government work, 17 U.S.C. 105).

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。

Signpost (not a knowledge pack) for the avionics development assurance standards landscape: RTCA DO-178C / EUROCAE ED-12C and its supplements (DO-330/ED-215, DO-331/ED-218, DO-332/ED-217, DO-333/ED-216); RTCA DO-254 / EUROCAE ED-80; SAE ARP4754B and ARP4761A; and the free regulator documents that recognise them (FAA AC 20-115D, AC 20-152A, Order 8110.49A; EASA AMC 20-115D and AMC 20-152A). Contains no source content: each row carries only the designation, title, edition, owner, redistributability status, and the owner's URL. Use when you need to identify, cite, or locate an avionics standard; paywalled rows point to the owner, free rows point to the regulator text, and the FAA rows also name the in-repo faa-8110-49 pack.

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。

타입·상태별로 반복되는 switch/if-else 분기를 다형성(인터페이스 + 구현 클래스)으로 치환. "switch를 다형성으로", "타입 분기를 클래스로", "strategy 패턴", "/replace-conditional-with-poly" 요청 시 사용. 단, null 분기만이면 /introduce-special-case, 조건식 가독성만이면 /decompose-conditional이 적합. /replace-conditional-with-poly [commit-ref]로 호출.

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。

암묵적 가정(null 아님·범위·상태)을 Assert/Validate로 명시하여 가정 위반 시 즉시 발견. "assertion 추가", "전제 조건 명시", "가정을 코드로", "/introduce-assertion" 요청 시 사용. 단, 반복되는 null 검사를 객체로 대체하는 것은 /introduce-special-case가 적합. /introduce-assertion [commit-ref]로 호출.

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。

Review code for potential issues and improvements. Use when asked to review specific files, functions, or code sections.

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。

Review whether a Clawix UI pattern, visual decision, copy change, or component extraction belongs in canon, debt, exception, or protected-surface scope.

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。

Update docs, playbooks, shims, generated docs, and alignment checks so public instructions route to the right canonical sources.

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 ClawJS/Clawix code hygiene without editing code, producing categorized findings, baseline status, and validation evidence.

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 or review an external integration QA lab with official surface snapshots, coverage matrices, fixtures, opt-in live lanes, and safe credential handling.

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。

Apply a Style to any artifact in the workspace (presentation, card, poster, social post, web page). Use when the user says "apply style X", "render this with style X", or wants to reuse a saved style on a new piece.

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。