「decide」の検索結果

Help the user decide what to charge and how to package it: the value metric, the tiers, the free-to-paid line, and finding the actual number. Use when the user is guessing at a price, priced too cheap and can't change it, is stuck on free vs paid, or believes "developers won't pay" so never charges.

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 writing, testing, or preparing ANY contribution or pull request to the JSONbored/awesome-claude (HeyClaude) repo — adding a community content entry (agent/MCP server/skill/hook/command/rule/guide/collection/statusline), or making a platform/code change (website, registry package, MCP package, scripts). The repo has two separate review paths: a private, one-shot "HeyClaude submission gate" that decides single-file content PRs, and the shared gittensory-orb bot that posts an advisory readiness/linked-issue comment on platform/code PRs but does not itself merge or close content PRs. Unlike JSONbored/gittensory and JSONbored/metagraphed, a linked issue is OPTIONAL here — do not import their mandatory-linked-issue rule into this repo. Invoke for any "contribute to / open a PR against / submit an entry to / fix a bug in awesome-claude (HeyClaude)" 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。

Write, revise or review a charter: the one document that tells an executor what to deliver, what is out of bounds, what the owner already decided, and how each success check will be proven. Use when work needs a written brief before someone else does it, or when asked to write, change or check a charter.

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。

Operate the `sno` command-line tool: install, update, check, and uninstall Sno products, read the exact commands and flags of the installed version, and run the account, skills, onboarding, Station telemetry and REM commands. Use when the owner or a task says "sno", "Sno CLI", "sno setup", "sno update", "sno doctor", "sno uninstall", "sno station", "telemetry consent", "rem verdict", "sno account", or "sno skills". The exact flags always come from the installed binary, never from this file. Do not use it to decide the owner's choices for them.

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。

Designs the contract for an API change inside one codebase — a component's props, a function surface, URL or query parameters, an event payload, or a module boundary — through a discovery pass, an options document with one recommendation, a question round, and an adversarial validation round, with every element of the contract justified from one stated goal. Use when you want to design, shape, decide, or nail down an interface, contract, signature, or API change for a capability you can already describe, sized for roughly one pull request. Produces a design document and changes no code. Does not specify what a feature should do — use plan-a-feature. Does not plan delivery or sequencing — use plan-implementation. Does not assess the architecture of existing code — use architectural-analysis. Does not write the code — use tdd. Does not restructure existing code — use refactor. Runs its rounds without pausing for review; to review each round as it lands, use pairing.

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。

Splits a body of context into a sequence of vertical-slice build phases where each phase is independently demonstrable to a real user and each builds on the previous. Use when the user wants to plan, sequence, phase, slice, break down, or order the build of a feature, capability, system, or initiative, and produces a plain-language phased build outline. Does not produce implementation detail — use plan-implementation. Does not specify behavior that has not been decided — use plan-a-feature. Does not perform gap analysis between two artifacts — use gap-analysis. Does not break a plan into independently-grabbable work items — use plan-work-items.

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。

Choose compatibility-aware scope for runtime and API changes in openai-guardrails-python. Use before initial implementation and each review-feedback batch to decide whether to patch, reset the design, preserve compatibility, or reject unsupported cases.

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。

Turn a ready-to-spec queue item into an approved plan through explicit human gates. Use when an item needs scope decided before code exists, when planning a feature, or before starting a migration. Runs interactively - not for unattended routines.

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。

Decide whether a task deserves its own git worktree and, if chosen, run it end to end: branch from the integration branch rather than the current tree, keep the main working copy untouched while the task runs, compare the result against the untouched baseline before declaring it done, and prepare it for a pull request instead of merging. Use when a request says to do the work in a new worktree or branch, when a change is large or risky enough that the main tree should stay usable, when several tasks need to run in parallel on one repository, when a result has to be diffed against current behavior, and when deciding where screenshots, builds, and other artifacts produced in a worktree should end up.

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。

Converges an underspecified request into a typed IntentSpec before planning or acting. Use when the user asks to implement, add, change, refactor, fix, migrate, configure, handle, triage, sort out, look into or decide something and the request leaves decisions open (which objects, which approach, what happens on failure, which trade-off), contradicts itself, admits two readings, or rests on an approach its sources may rule out — in a codebase, a ticket queue, a research brief or a runbook — or when the user says "clarify the intent", "what do you need from me", or invokes intent-router. Looks up what its sources hold (code, history, decision records, a ticket log, an order record, the policy in force) before asking; asks only preference or irreversible questions, one at a time, with a recommended default; halts instead of guessing; checks the delivered work against the spec. Silent on a fully stated task its sources do not contradict. Not for explaining existing state ("what does X do", "why is Y slow").

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 and scope production work with Odyssey's real-time interactive video world models (odyssey.ml — Odyssey-1/Odyssey-2/Starchild-1/Agora-1). Use when a request involves generating video that a user steers live with keyboard, text, speech, or controller input (streamed frames that respond in the moment), or when someone must decide between Odyssey-style interactive generation and offline clip generators (Sora/Veo/Kling) or downloadable 3D / game engines. Covers what is verified versus announced, current access routes, latency and coherence limits, feasible-now versus speculative use cases, pricing/access terms, and content/rights considerations. This is a fast-moving research-stage product; the skill teaches honest scoping, not a promise of production reliability.

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 speech and clone voices with Fish Audio — its hosted TTS API (S2.1-Pro / S2-Pro / S1 model lineup, REST + WebSocket streaming, instant and persistent voice cloning) and its open-weight OpenAudio S1-mini / Fish-Speech models for self-hosting. Use this skill when an agent must generate narration or dialogue through Fish Audio, choose between Fish Audio's hosted models and open weights, clone a voice from reference audio, author emotion/tone/special markers for expressive delivery, estimate cost from UTF-8 bytes, wire real-time streaming for a voice agent, decide whether self-hosting beats the API, or review Fish Audio TTS output for production. Do not use it to pick a different provider — it covers Fish Audio specifically.

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 3D assets with Meshy (meshy.ai) through its REST API and web platform — text-to-3D, image-to-3D, multi-image-to-3D, AI texturing/PBR, remesh/topology control, UV, and auto-rigging/animation. Use this skill when an agent must generate a mesh from a prompt or reference image, control polygon count and topology, apply or restyle textures, rig a humanoid for animation, export to GLB/FBX/OBJ/USDZ/STL for Unity/Unreal/Blender, drive Meshy's asynchronous job API (auth, polling, streaming, webhooks, credits, rate limits), review generated meshes for game/film/print readiness, or decide whether Meshy is the right tool at all. Not for editing an existing hand-modeled asset's geometry, hard-surface CAD with exact dimensions, or guaranteed-watertight manufacturing parts.

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 audio-first podcast episodes with generative tools — design the show and episode format (interview, narrative, news brief, two-host conversational), write scripts for the ear, decide between fully-synthetic and hybrid (recorded human + synthetic) production and meet the disclosure duty each triggers, cast and direct multi-voice TTS for consistency and chemistry, build episode structure (cold open, intro/outro, segments, ad slots), assemble and edit, clear music and SFX rights, hit podcast loudness and delivery standards, ship metadata/chapters/transcripts through RSS, and pass platform AI-content policy and QA before publishing. Use this skill whenever the deliverable is a podcast episode or a podcast show bible, or when an agent must make production, rights, disclosure, or delivery decisions for spoken-word audio. Not for music tracks, single-voice notification prompts, or video where picture leads (route audio-for-video to a video 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。

Batch effect correction for CRISPR screens covering ComBat empirical-Bayes, RUV, SVA, control-sgRNA normalization, and the model-based alternative of including batch as a covariate in MAGeCK MLE or Chronos. Covers screen-specific batch sources (passage cohort, library lot, infection day, sequencing run, Cas9 lot, FBS lot), PCA + variance-decomposition diagnostic to decide if correction is needed, when correction harms biology by over-correcting condition into batch, limma removeBatchEffect for visualization-only correction, and relationship to multi-condition design matrices. Use when combining screens for joint analysis, when passage cohort confounds biology, when DepMap-style panels need Chronos with batch covariates, when picking ComBat vs RUV, or when correction harms biology and should be replaced with explicit covariate modeling.

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。

Manage per-feature living documents that capture decisions, constraints, and reasoning across AI sessions during active development. Scoped to feature-level work — design, implementation, bugfix, refactor — not for codebase-wide assessments or product-wide specifications (those define their own document lifecycles). Handles creating new context documents, loading existing ones, and enriching them with new decisions. Use when starting a new feature, resuming work, making technical decisions, resolving questions, or when context needs to persist across sessions. Use this skill whenever the user mentions 'load context', 'update context', 'context doc', 'decisions', 'continue where we left off', 'what did we decide', or 'capture this decision'.

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。

Shared vocabulary for designing deep modules. Use when the user wants to design or improve a module's interface, find deepening opportunities, decide where a seam goes, make code more testable or AI-navigable, or when another skill needs the deep-module vocabulary.

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 and adapt monkey patches in vllm_metax/patch/ against a target upstream revision. Decide whether to retain, update, migrate, or remove each patch; maintain patch headers and explanations; validate changes and record evidence. Use only for compatibility work on this directory, not standalone attention backend, model, kernel, or other adaptations elsewhere in vllm_metax.

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 and visualize QA dashboards and reports with Allure Report, Grafana, and ReportPortal. Covers test execution visualization, stakeholder-facing quality reports, trend/flakiness panels, release-readiness gates, alerting, and CI integration for automated report generation. Use when: "test dashboard," "Allure," "test report," "quality dashboard," "Grafana," "ReportPortal," "test results visualization." Not for: defining which KPIs to measure or how to interpret them — use qa-metrics (this skill builds the panels; qa-metrics decides what they should show). Related: qa-metrics, ci-cd-integration, ai-bug-triage.

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 and assess every issue in the TMDb project board's Backlog column — re-verify each against current main with a read-only fan-out, close the mechanically dead, promote the actionable to Ready with priority, size and execution order, and leave the rest in Backlog naming the decision they need. Use to groom the backlog, before planning a release, or on a schedule. Runs headless: it decides for itself within the rules below.

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。

World-class landing page expertise combining conversion rate optimization science, persuasive design psychology, and the craft of pages that turn visitors into customers. Landing pages are where marketing meets reality—the moment of truth where visitors decide. Great landing pages aren't just pretty—they're conversion machines. The best landing page designers understand that every element must earn its place, that friction is the enemy, and that the goal isn't to impress—it's to convert. Speed, clarity, and persuasion in perfect balance. Use when "landing page, conversion page, lead capture, signup page, pricing page, hero section, above the fold, CTA design, conversion rate, page optimization, lead gen page, squeeze page, sales page, landing-pages, conversion, CRO, design, optimization, lead-generation, signups, forms" mentioned.

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。

MEMO-ONLY prior-work overlap advisory: surfaces the two ADVISORY taxonomy signals neither a tool nor a model can decide from the paper alone — ADV-TRIVIAL-COMBINATION (standard A+B+C / 缝合 stapling) and ADV-DUPLICATE-PUBLICATION (repackaged / duplicate submission). The executor RETRIEVES candidate prior work (DBLP fuzzy-title + boolean · WebSearch · WebFetch) from the paper's own title + contribution spans in the evidence ledger; TWO fresh cross-model codex reviewers (one per axis) LAY OUT the overlap side-by-side against each anchored contribution claim. It NEVER rules 'trivial' or 'duplicate' (that is a human judgment) and absence of a match is NOT evidence of originality. Emits novelty-duplication-advisory.memo.md + an info-only findings mirror; carries NO verdict weight — tools/adjudicate_findings.py lists it in ZERO_WEIGHT_SKILLS and caps it at info. Detect-only. Adapted from ARIS novelty-check, reframed from 'is MY idea novel' to 'here is the overlap a reviewer should weigh'. Triggers: "novelty advisory", "duplication check", "prior-work overlap", "is this stapling", "缝合", "查重", "重复发表", "duplicate submission".

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 whether a paper's EVALUATION DESIGN actually measures what it claims and whether its reporting is complete — the validity layer family D (experiment-forensics) cannot reach. Three patterns: train/test leakage means the reported score may not measure generalization (HP-EVAL-LEAKAGE — adopts the Kapoor & Narayanan 8-type / 3-category leakage taxonomy; the illegitimate-proxy / sampling-bias / pretraining-contamination subtypes hand off as needs_external_check, naming but NEVER running Oren-2023 exchangeability / Shi-2023 Min-K% / Golchin-2023 Time-Travel / BIG-bench canary); a load-bearing LLM judge is conflicted (same model/family as a compared system) or unvalidated (no human-agreement, no bias control) (HP-JUDGE-VALIDITY); a declared condition/metric is dropped or switched to favor the method, or 'best' is chosen with no held-out set (HP-SELECTIVE-REPORTING). Verdict-bearing at L0/L1 from the DESCRIBED protocol — NOT repo-gated like experiment-forensics; L2 only CONFIRMS against split/preprocessing/result files. A fresh cross-model reviewer (gpt-5.6-sol xhigh, read-only, fresh thread per pass) PROPOSES findings, each span-anchored to a ledger claim_id; tools/adjudicate_findings.py DECIDES the verdict. Leakage and under-reporting are usually HONEST methodological errors — every finding describes a discrepancy to CHECK, never an accusation. An LLM generating GROUND-TRUTH labels is HP-FAKE-GT (experiment-forensics) — routed there, not here. Emits eval-design-forensics.findings.json; computes NO verdict. Detect-only. Triggers: "eval design audit", "evaluation validity", "train/test leakage", "data leakage", "is the score measuring generalization", "LLM judge bias", "is the judge validated", "selective reporting", "cherry-picked results", "评估设计审计", "评测有效性", "数据泄漏", "训练测试集泄漏", "裁判模型有没有验证", "选择性报告".

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。

End-to-end substantive-integrity forensic sweep of a research paper (especially autoresearch / AI-Scientist-style output). Orchestrates the whole pipeline: ingest (arxiv-id | pdf | dir → working dir + pdftotext for L0) → /evidence-ledger (artifact manifest + observability level L0/L1/L2 + span-anchored claims.json) → fan out the integrity auditor skills (consistency, citation, baseline, experiment, presentation, proof-derivation, eval-design — each reads the ledger, emits span-anchored findings) + the zero-verdict-weight AIS writing-style track → advisory memos (/adversarial-case-builder + /novelty-duplication-advisory, no verdict weight) → deterministic tools/adjudicate_findings.py (--ledger REQUIRED) → reviewer-ready Integrity Forensics Report. Cross-model (fresh codex per dimension) and reviewer≠adjudicator: the model proposes findings, the deterministic adjudicator decides the verdict. Observability-aware, detect-only, never an opaque AI-text classifier (a separate zero-weight AIS section lists AI writing-style impressions, never moving the verdict). Triggers: "anti-autoresearch", "integrity audit this paper", "forensic review", "audit a submission", "审一篇投稿的诚信".

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。