685 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Turn TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, X, LinkedIn, Reddit, or Rumble transcripts into timestamped hooks, claims, objections, proof, calls to action, sponsorship signals, and reusable content atoms. Use directly for transcript analysis or as support for creator, competitor, trend, demand, and repurposing work.
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。
Render a designed 'value prop' video from a config — 3-5 noun-phrase benefit claims (<=4 words each) revealed sequentially over per-SKU product visuals, one crisp editorial frame per claim (hook sticker -> N claim beats -> brand end card). Deterministic PIL/HTML beat renderer frame-stepped via Playwright and encoded with FFmpeg, sound-off legible, hard cuts, uniform pacing. FREE (no paid calls); music is added separately (create-music-elevenlabs). Use for the value-prop 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。
Write a short-form video ad from an evidence-backed angle and the selected template's actual recipe. Reuses or fetches ad-angle-miner, preserves the chosen angle, plans words and visuals together, checks product claims and production fit, and delivers the strongest script with useful alternatives. Use before video production and for script rewrites. Customer language is one input alongside audience, promise, product proof, offer and 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。
Research competitors, analyze their messaging, and generate a positioning document with category definition, differentiation claims, value propositions, and proof points. Chains web research, competitor site analysis, and review mining to produce a positioning doc ready for website copy and sales deck use. Use when a product marketing team needs to define or refresh positioning ahead of a launch, rebrand, or competitive shift.
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 intake stage of a Meta ad harness. Researches the brand first, states what it assumes, and asks only what it cannot infer and what would change money, claims or legal exposure if guessed wrong — at most four questions a turn, in plain business language. Writes the brand's stable facts (ads/brand.md), the campaign brief, and a log of what was asked vs assumed. Use it when someone wants to run Meta ads and the brand's ad facts are not yet recorded.
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。
Delimits putative species boundaries from molecular data within the de Queiroz 2007 unified-lineage framework using ASAP (Puillandre 2021 successor to ABGD), mPTP C++ (Kapli 2017 successor to bPTP; bPTP is Python NOT R), GMYC single/multi-threshold (Pons 2006; Fujisawa 2013), multilocus BPP v4 with prior calibration from data (NOT defaults; Yang 2015), SNAPP + BFD* for SNP delimitation, DELINEATE (Sukumaran 2021) speciation-process modeling to address Sukumaran & Knowles 2017 PNAS critique that MSC delimits structure not species, integrative-taxonomy congruence (Padial 2010; Carstens 2013), Dsuite for introgression testing before sister claims (Malinsky 2021), and Meyer & Paulay 2005 barcoding-gap-absence caveat. Use when delineating species from DNA barcoding data, resolving cryptic complexes, choosing among ASAP/mPTP/BPP/DELINEATE, calibrating BPP priors, distinguishing introgression from ILS, or applying the Sukumaran-Knowles oversplitting correction.
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。
Performs subgroup and heterogeneous treatment effect (HTE) analyses for clinical trials. Covers Mantel-Haenszel pooling, Breslow-Day, interaction tests in regression, RERI for additive interaction, modern data-adaptive HTE methods (STEPP, SIDES, causal forests, X/R-learners), Bayesian shrinkage (Dixon-Simon, MAP, EXNEX), graphical multiplicity (Bretz-Maurer), and credibility frameworks (Sun BMJ, EMA 2019). Use when analyzing treatment effects across patient subgroups for regulatory submissions or precision-medicine 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。
Prove that a command-line tool actually did what it said, instead of trusting its exit code and its output. Snapshots the filesystem before and after, names the expected consequence in advance, and returns one of four verdicts with what could not be seen. Use after running a build, a migration, a scaffolder, a formatter, a codegen step, or an AI coding CLI; when a command printed success and you are about to report "done"; when you are about to write "exit code 0, so it worked"; or when a tool claims it edited files. Needs nothing installed.
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 doing ANY task involving Supabase. Triggers: Supabase products (Database, Auth, Edge Functions, Realtime, Storage, Vectors, Cron, Queues); client libraries and SSR integrations (supabase-js, @supabase/ssr) in Next.js, React, SvelteKit, Astro, Remix; auth issues (login, logout, sessions, JWT, cookies, getSession, getUser, getClaims, RLS); Supabase CLI or MCP server; schema changes, migrations, declarative schemas, security audits, Postgres extensions (pg_graphql, pg_cron, pg_vector); debugging and troubleshooting errors or unexpected behavior on Supabase projects (HTTP errors, Postgres errors, RLS surprises, permission denied, schema cache issues, timeouts, Edge Function crashes, Realtime drops, Storage failures) and reading or querying logs (Logs Explorer, ClickHouse).
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。
Read BEFORE optimizing any MATLAB code for speed. Without this workflow, agents commonly optimize the wrong target, fabricate speedup claims without measurement, or introduce regressions. Guides the 7-step workflow: baseline, profile, identify, optimize, measure, verify, 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。
Verify claims, quotations, citations and references against live primary sources, and produce a reproducible audit record instead of an assertion. Use when asked to: check whether a quotation, verse, statistic, date, attribution or citation is accurate; verify references before publishing a report, thesis, article, slide deck or legal filing; confirm a text against an authoritative database; cross-check a claim across independent sources; build a citation register or verification appendix; find out whether two datasets agree; detect a misattributed or fabricated quotation; or audit a document's existing citations. Source-agnostic by design, with working providers for REST/JSON APIs, scraped HTML, bulk corpora, bibliographic catalogues (OpenLibrary), DOI resolution (Crossref) and reference works (Wikipedia) -- including scriptural tiers (Qur'an.com, sunnah.com and an independent hadith corpus) with full diacritic handling for Arabic, Hebrew, Greek and any script with optional marks. Covers content-addressed matching when sources disagree on numbering, graded match verdicts, byte-level integrity checks, published-string verification, and a catalogue of silent failure modes (identifier divergence, mojibake, scraper blocking, false-positive keyword rules, missing glyphs, unreliable PDF text layers).
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。
Gather external knowledge the spec needs and distill it into §R — the durable research log — so build grounds in facts instead of hallucinating library behavior. Each finding cites a source; unsourced claims are flagged, never written as fact. Triggers when a spec decision hinges on a library/API/best practice the agent is unsure of, when the user says "research this", "what's the best lib for…", "check current best practice", or invokes /ck:research. Defers the §R write to the spec skill.
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 an evidence-based competitive pricing strategy for ecommerce products. Use when a seller asks how to position a price against competitors, set regular and promotional prices, protect contribution margin, design bundles or price tiers, respond to competitor moves, or coordinate prices across Amazon, Shopify, TikTok Shop, Walmart, eBay, or other channels. Do not use for automated repricing implementation or claims of a mathematically proven optimal price without sufficient data.
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。
Trace where the user's recorded position on something has shifted: superseded claims, contradictions between sources of different dates, and what evidence moved them. Use this skill when the user asks what they have changed their mind about, how their thinking on a topic developed, what they used to believe, or wants a quarterly look back at their own positions. Do NOT use for finding contradictions between sources with no time dimension, or for a current-state answer.
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。
Plan the smallest set of diagnostic, comparison, paper, and appendix figures or tables needed to support verified mathematical-modeling decisions and 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。
Assemble a submission-ready writer package from final method, result, robustness, figure, and human-decision artifacts, then freeze approved numerical claims with provenance.
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 scoped or final cross-media consistency checks for mathematical-modeling artifacts, comparing canonical numbers, symbols, parameters, decisions, files, and paper claims without performing full-workspace audits for low-risk changes.
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 an inherited engagement or implementation against its evidence. Use when taking over work or joining mid-project; distinguish verified facts from inherited 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。
Produce honest product reviews and buying guides without fabricated first-hand experience, using disclosed evidence tiers: verified specs, owner-experience synthesis at scale, expert triangulation, and hands-on only when true. Use this skill whenever the user wants to write product reviews or buying guides without hands-on access, set up a review methodology, add evidence disclosure to review content, align reviews with Google's reviews system or FTC affiliate disclosure expectations, or decide when Review and Product schema are honest to use. Triggers on product review, buying guide, best-of list, review methodology, evidence basis, hands-on testing, we tested, affiliate review site, review disclosure, methodology block, original research, reviews system. Also triggers when review content claims testing that did not happen, or when an affiliate site needs a trust mechanism that survives scrutiny.
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。
Patent research and IP landscape: prior-art search, claim mapping, landscape analysis, and freedom-to-operate. Use when conducting a prior-art search, mapping an IP landscape, evaluating patentability, or running an FTO analysis.
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 the scored pre-publish gate via eval-runner.py: claims, brand voice, compliance, AI tells. "check this before we publish"
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。
Reviews or drafts the agreement that pays an employee to settle their claims — and flags the statutory conditions that decide whether it actually binds them. Works under s.203 ERA 1996 for England & Wales. Flags apparent s.203 condition gaps for a solicitor to confirm (writing, specific complaints, independent adviser, identification, insurance, statement of conditions), drafts the substantive terms (sum, tax characterisation, confidentiality, references, restrictive covenants, indemnities), and surfaces enforceability risks. Does not rule on validity and is not legal advice. Use when the user says 'review this settlement agreement', 'draft a settlement agreement', 'compromise agreement' (old term), or asks whether an agreement is binding.
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。
No Inference / Source-Locked Verification. Forces Claude to answer ONLY from user-provided materials and/or online sources actually accessed — no inference, no assumptions, no gap-filling. Every factual, legal, numerical, or procedural claim must be anchored to a cited source. Use whenever Claude reviews documents, summarises evidence, checks accuracy, drafts submissions, creates timelines, extracts facts, checks citations, analyses rules, prepares legal arguments, compares documents, verifies claims, produces chronologies, works from uploaded materials, performs legal research, checks case status, or does anything where evidential fidelity matters. Also trigger on: 'source-locked', 'no inference', 'only from the materials', 'don't assume', 'stick to the evidence', 'verify this', 'check this is right', 'work from the documents'. Overrides Claude's default tendency to fill gaps. If evidential accuracy matters, use this skill.
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。
Produces an adversarial attack on a legal argument that survives reply. Runs the opposing-counsel discipline twice: an unrestrained first pass, then the same instrument turned on that pass to cut every point that collapses under challenge - attacks on conceded facts, wrong-forum objections, speculation about documents and motives, gotchas with innocent explanations, overclaims, self-refuting assertions, and padding. The deliverable is one standalone attack containing only what can be defended, capped at five heads, not a discussion of the discarded draft. Use to attack, stress-test, red-team or rebut a submission, brief, motion, witness statement, letter or structured legal reasoning. Triggers on "attack this but only with points that hold", "no cheap shots", "what survives reply", "which points can I actually defend", "give me the version I can file", "double-pass adversarial review". Also use when an earlier adversarial review came back overlong or scattershot. Formal British English.
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。