685 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Enforce the replication-protocol.md rule by cross-checking numeric claims in a manuscript against the actual R / Stata / Python outputs. Report PASS/FAIL per claim against tolerance thresholds. Use before submission and before releasing a replication package.
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 a project's to-do list and memory in GitHub issues — files each finding (from a review, an audit, or the user) as its own issue without duplicates, lists the open issues that bear on the current work, and closes an issue with a comment recording what was wrong, what was tried, what worked, and how it was fixed. Use when review findings or a list of problems should become tracked work (a paper's misleading claims, a codebase's bugs, improvements for later), when starting or resuming work and deciding what to do next, or when a fix has landed and its issue should be closed with a record. Needs the GitHub CLI; warns before posting to a public repository.
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。
Assemble a submission-ready replication package to the AEA Data and Code Availability Standard (DCAS) / openICPSR / Social Science Reproduction Platform expectations — standard replication README, dataset manifest, computational-requirements capture, a Table/Figure → script:line map, and a confidential-data deposit plan. Use when user says "build the replication package", "prepare the openICPSR deposit", "make the AEA data and code package", "DCAS compliance", "assemble the deposit for the journal", or after a paper is accepted and the journal's data editor needs the package. NOT a numeric verifier — it calls /audit-reproducibility to confirm claims reproduce before packaging.
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。
Comprehensive adversarial audit of a theory, proof, math/econ paper, codebase, or set of claims — decompose into components, fan out independent skeptics that must return CONCRETE defects, adjudicate every finding with a separate judge, fix all confirmed defects, then re-verify. Use when correctness must be bulletproof and single-pass or round-by-round review is too slow and too shallow. Invoke for "audit this rigorously", "find ALL the bugs/gaps", "make this rock solid", "converge faster on correctness".
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。
AI DevKit · Enforce evidence-based completion claims — require fresh command output before reporting success. Use when completing any task, fixing a bug, finishing a phase, running tests, building, deploying, or making any "it works" claim.
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 factual claims from PR copy, verify each claim independently, attach concrete citations, and warn when certainty is low. Runs each claim through proven newsroom verification methods (lateral reading, source-tier climbing, provenance pillars, triangulation, calibrated rating) and puts the burden of proof on the speaker. Use before a pitch, press release, reactive comment, DM, or other journalist-facing draft is trusted or sent.
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。
Diagnoses and safely reclaims macOS disk space: caches, logs, app remnants, large/duplicate files, Docker/OrbStack, Chromium code-sign clones, developer caches. Use when a Mac is low on storage, shows “Caching needs more space”, or before deleting anything to avoid data loss. Not for Windows/Linux or permission issues (use macos-permissions).
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。
Write a product listing for an overseas marketplace or store, localised for the buyer rather than translated from Chinese: title, bullet points, description, search terms and the compliance claims that must or must not appear. Use when asked 帮我写亚马逊 listing, 跨境电商标题, write a product listing for Amazon, TikTok Shop, Shopee, Lazada, Etsy or Shopify, or localise my listing for the US, UK, Germany or Japan. Produces the listing in the target language within the platform's field limits, a keyword map, a compliance check of every claim, and a list of images the listing needs.
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。
Produce a CV shaped for one target company and role: its applicant tracking system, the country's conventions, the sector's norms, its published values and the job ad, with every choice explained. Use when asked to write my CV for a specific company, tailor my CV to Google, Amazon or any named employer, make my CV fit this company's format, or turn my experience into a CV for this job. Produces the tailored CV, a short format rationale citing public sources with dates, and a list of claims the person must be ready to defend. Never invents experience or insider knowledge.
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。
Run a fast, honest competitive scan — the dimension table built from public evidence (sites, docs, pricing pages, changelogs, reviews), the claims-vs-observed discipline, and the so-what synthesis that ends in moves, not a landscape mural. Use when asked what are competitors doing, quick scan of these three rivals, how does our pricing/feature set compare, or prep the competitive slide honestly. Produces the evidence-based comparison table, the marketing-vs-reality flags, the so-what synthesis, and the staleness date.
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。
Handle a dispute with a contractor — unfinished work, poor quality, overcharging, or a no-show — with a path that protects your money and your options. Use when asked to deal with a contractor dispute, my contractor did bad work / won't finish / overcharged, or how to get a builder to fix their work. Produces a read on your position (contract, payments, evidence), a firm-but-professional communication and demand path, documentation and payment-leverage guidance, and escalation options (mediation, licensing board, chargeback, small claims) — flagging that it's not legal advice.
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。
Triage an incoming insurance claim: check the coverage trigger against policy wording, band severity and complexity, screen for fraud indicators, set a first-pass reserve range, and route with an SLA. Use when asked to triage a claim, review a first notice of loss (FNOL), assess a new claim, decide fast-track vs adjuster routing, or screen a claim for SIU referral. Produces a structured triage note with coverage view, severity band, indicator screen, reserve range, and a routing recommendation.
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。
Check AI output before you trust or use it — where it's likely wrong, what to verify, and how to catch confident-sounding errors. Use when asked can I trust this AI answer, how do I verify what AI told me, fact-check this AI output, or is this AI response reliable. Produces a risk read on the specific output (the claims most likely to be wrong or made up), the parts that need independent verification vs the parts that are low-risk, how to actually verify each, the tells of AI hallucination and overconfidence, and a habit for building verification into your AI use — because AI is confidently wrong often enough that unchecked trust is a real risk.
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。
Records visual proof while testing UI behavior — the agent tests the app hands-on via computer use while a screen recording with structured test/assertion annotations captures the session — then posts the video and a results summary to the PR and tracker issue. Use whenever a change needs verifiable evidence that it works, instead of prose claims — including headless environments (scripted screenshots and probes) and non-UI changes (measured numbers, output pairs).
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 truthfulness, accuracy, and link integrity of content before publishing. Catches fabricated statistics, dead URLs, misattributed sources, and company claims that contradict the brand DNA.
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。
Freshly judge whether a finished change and its claims meet original acceptance: PASS, FAIL or NOT_PROVEN. Use when: asked for a go/no-go, sign-off or independent verdict.
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 claims that work is done or shipped against the diff or repo. Use when: asked whether something really got done, even if it looks obvious.
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。
Periodic trust sweep of persistent memory and durable knowledge notes - re-verifies environment-dependent claims against the live environment, stamps last_verified + confidence, and proposes archiving drifted entries
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 generated or changed documentation before it ships — READMEs, API references, docstrings, PHPDoc/JSDoc, changelogs, tutorials, and doc sites. Best used reactively after an agent writes or edits docs, after code changes documented behavior, or before publishing docs. Use when the user says 'review the docs', 'is this documentation accurate', 'update the docs', 'write a README', 'document this API', 'add a docstring', or 'add a changelog entry'. Core job: verify every referenced function, flag, endpoint, config key, and code sample against the source; catch docs-vs-code drift; strip filler and unverifiable claims. DO NOT USE for production code review (use clean-code-guard), test review (use test-guard), marketing copy or blog posts, prose style editing of non-technical writing, or documentation site theming.
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 revising an AISTATS paper for concise AI-statistics framing, theorem-and-experiment clarity, 8-page two-column compression, double-blind wording, reproducibility clarity, statistically careful claims, and assumption-labeling discipline that survives statistician reviewers.
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 revising an ACM CCS paper for a precise threat model, calibrated attack/defense claims, 12-page ACM sigconf compression, double-blind wording, adaptive-evaluation honesty, and the security house style that survives an adversarial SIGSAC program committee.
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 revising an ACL paper for computational-linguistics house style, covering task-first framing, linguistic examples tied to quantitative error analysis, scoping language claims to tested languages, LLM-era claim discipline, anonymous self-reference, Limitations prose, and compressing into the 8-page or 4-page ACL format.
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 revising an AAMAS paper so the interaction contribution leads the first page, the solution concept or incentive property is named, the game and agents are legible, claims are paired with proofs or multiagent experiments, the argument fits eight two-column pages plus references, and the wording stays double-blind.
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 packaging AAMAS multiagent code, environments, opponent and population sets, random seeds, game definitions, and logs as anonymous supplementary evidence or a public post-acceptance release, even without a separate artifact badge, so that game-theory and MARL reviewers can inspect and re-run the interaction 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。