377 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Multi-agent structured debate with anti-groupthink mechanisms — Devil's Advocate, minority opinion protection, 2-round hard cap. Use when divergent perspectives matter more than consensus (architecture decisions, design tradeoffs, contested specifications).
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。
Clarify requirements before implementing. Use when serious doubts arise.
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。
Adversarial code review that breaks the self-review monoculture. Use when you want a genuinely critical review of recent changes, before merging a PR, or when you suspect Claude is being too agreeable about code quality. Forces perspective shifts through hostile reviewer personas that catch blind spots the author's mental model shares with the reviewer.
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-angle review of responses before delivery. Audits from 4 perspectives -- factual accuracy, logical consistency, completeness, and safety. Use for high-stakes responses where errors have real consequences.
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 for Six Thinking Hats or de Bono's parallel thinking, or when a decision or idea needs facts, gut feel, risks, benefits and new options kept apart: "look at this from all sides", "full perspective check". Skip for plain factual questions or single-angle hot takes.
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。
Tell the agent to zoom out and give broader context or a higher-level perspective. Use when you're unfamiliar with a section of code or need to understand how it fits into the bigger picture.
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。
Expert-level biochemistry from a biology perspective covering metabolic pathways, enzyme kinetics, bioenergetics, signal transduction, and the biochemical basis of cellular processes.
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, automated anti-pattern detection, 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。
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
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。
Perform a dual-lens critical review of the specification and plan from both product strategy and engineering risk perspectives before implementation.
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。
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
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。
Combine independent work from two or more selected agents into one decision-ready research report, design, or proposal. Preserve useful complementary findings, develop stronger combined options, and present material alternatives only when they exist. Use when multiple perspectives should improve the product without forcing consensus or staging disagreement.
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。
Padrões de orquestração multi-agente. Use quando múltiplas tarefas independentes podem rodar com diferentes especialidades de domínio ou quando uma análise abrangente requer múltiplas perspectivas.
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 UI/flows from cognitive load, error prevention, and accessibility perspectives. Apply when reviewing UX, discussing user confusion, high drop-off, or form usability issues.
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。
Routes general Convex requests to the right project skill. Use when the user asks which Convex skill to use or gives an underspecified Convex app task.
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。
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。
Routes general Convex requests to the right project skill. Use when the user asks which Convex skill to use or gives an underspecified Convex app task.
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。
Clarify requirements before implementing. Use when serious doubts arise.
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。
Web and App implementation guide for 3D UI. Trigger when user wants actual 3D objects, perspective effects, and spatial depth.
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 clarification workflow for underspecified requirements. Use before planning to resolve ambiguities through coverage-based questioning. Records answers in spec clarifications section.
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。
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
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 analyzing bug ticket data to identify quality trends, assess software quality status, and provide improvement recommendations. Use when a user provides bug lists (CSV, Excel, JSON, or Markdown format) and needs comprehensive quality analysis from a QA manager perspective. Generates statistical analysis, identifies quality hotspots, provides actionable recommendations, and produces professional Markdown reports suitable for project managers and executive leadership. Ideal for IT system development, migration, and implementation projects.
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 this skill when you need to review presentation materials from an audience perspective to improve their quality and effectiveness. Evaluates content clarity, visual design, logical flow, engagement factors, and Marp technical compatibility. Triggers include "review my presentation", "check my slides", "presentation feedback", or when a user has completed a draft presentation and wants comprehensive quality review.
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。