Use when <clear trigger condition for 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。
3,757 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Use when <clear trigger condition for 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。
Use when explaining a technical concept and adapting depth, pacing, and examples to the learner's readiness.
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 the learner benefits from guided questioning to build reasoning and uncover misconceptions before receiving direct answers.
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 a concept is too abstract for the learner's current level and needs analogy-first teaching before complexity re-injection.
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 a learner has surface understanding and needs to explore mechanism, tradeoffs, edge cases, and production implications at 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。
Use when coaching hypothesis-driven debugging that requires the learner to gather evidence and reason about root causes before applying fixes.
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 guiding a learner through real project implementation while preserving their ownership and teaching through the build process.
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 diagnosing a repeated conceptual mistake and designing a targeted correction loop to replace the faulty mental model.
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 critiquing a system design across correctness, scalability, reliability, maintainability, and observability using probe-first questioning.
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 scheduling and executing review sessions at scientifically-calibrated expanding intervals for long-term retention.
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 capturing or restoring a learner's persistent profile to personalize teaching across 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。
Use when structuring a multi-session learning roadmap with milestones, gates, and pacing calibrated to learner level and goal.
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 logging, scoring, and triaging a learner's persistent weak areas to drive intervention selection.
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。
Diagnostic Playwright workflows for flaky or failing tests, including trace analysis, UI mode, and state isolation.
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。
Playwright workflows for authenticated browser state reuse through storageState and setup 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。
Playwright workflows for deterministic third-party responses using page.route().
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。
Conducts rigorous authoring and review of Playwright E2E tests. Enforces accessibility-first locators, web-first assertions, strict isolation, and DAMP architecture. Use when generating, refactoring, or reviewing any Playwright test code.
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 code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
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 a draft controls and gap pack from a requirement, regulation, standard or policy and the organisation's control descriptions: obligations broken out of the source text, the controls that appear to address each, apparent coverage, gaps, questions for control owners and actions to assess. Never concludes compliance or that a control is effective; owners and audit assess. Use when the user asks to "map this regulation to our controls", "run a controls gap analysis", "break this standard into obligations" or "where is our control coverage thin". Do not use for comparing a policy document against a standard, use policy-gap-review instead; to draft evidence requests from the mapped controls, use control-evidence-request-pack. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Turns a list of merged changes, closed work items or commit messages the user provides into DRAFT release notes under the version heading and date the user supplies, grouped as features, fixes and other, in the organisation's tone from the style guide or prior notes given, with every entry traced to its source item, breaking changes and required actions flagged first, and internal-only items held back for the release owner to confirm. Use when the user asks to "write the release notes for this version", "turn these merged pull requests into a changelog", "summarise what shipped this sprint for customers", "draft the what's new for this release" or "group these closed tickets into release notes". Do not use for an announcement email or intranet post about a launch, use announcement-drafter instead; for a change ticket, use change-request-pack; for a how-to article about one fix, use knowledge-article-drafter. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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 DRAFT user personas from the research notes, interview summaries, survey free text and support themes the user provides: for each persona the goals, pains, jobs to be done, context of use, quotes exactly as supplied with their participant codes, and the evidence count behind every attribute, with names, demographics and any detail no participant stated left UNKNOWN rather than invented. Use when the user asks to "build personas from these interviews", "who are our users based on this research", "draft user personas", "turn these research notes into personas" or "update our personas with the new interviews". Do not use for theming a batch of customer feedback into counts, use customer-feedback-theme-synthesis instead; for exit interviews, use exit-interview-synthesis; for the requirements those personas imply, use product-requirements-draft. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Turns sustainability or ESG reports the user provides into a DRAFT question pack for reviewers: every quantitative disclosure as stated with unit, period, boundary and page, year-over-year changes computed only from the stated figures with the arithmetic shown, targets with stated and computed progress, restatements and inconsistencies, gaps and specific questions to the report owner. No assurance, accuracy or conformance verdict. Use when the user asks to "prepare review questions on our sustainability report", "what changed year on year in this ESG report", "check the figures in this report before it goes to the board", "find the gaps in this ESG disclosure" or "build a question pack for the report owner". Do not use for reviewing marketing text against environmental-claim rules, use green-claims-review instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Summarises one sprint from the board export, sprint report and review or stand-up notes the user provides into a one-page DRAFT sprint review summary: the sprint goal as written, items delivered, items not delivered with the reasons the sources state, carry-over, impediments, metrics exactly as given, and numbered questions for the retrospective, every row referenced to a work item or note fragment and every missing fact marked UNKNOWN. Use when the user asks to "summarise the sprint", "write the sprint review", "what did we deliver this sprint", "list the carry-over and blockers" or "draft the sprint recap". Do not use for the retrospective write-up or themed lessons across several sprints, use lessons-learned-synthesis instead; for a weekly project status report, use project-status-tracker. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Drafts answers to the questions in a received RFP, RFQ or tender from the organisation's past responses, answer library, case studies, policies and other documents provided: one row per buyer question with a draft answer marked Reused, Adapted or Missing, its source and date, and a legal or pricing review flag on every answer touching terms, liability, warranties, insurance, data protection or price. Use when the user asks to "draft our RFP response", "answer this tender from our past proposals", "pre-fill the bid questions", "first pass at the RFQ answers" or "reuse our previous bid content". Do not use for writing the buyer's own RFP or requirements, use rfp-requirements-pack instead; for security or due diligence questionnaires use vendor-security-questionnaire-prefill; for scoring received supplier responses use rfp-comparison-pack. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。