2,667 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Full ASVS 5.0 compliance assessment against a codebase and/or architecture diagrams. Reads all 346 controls from the companion CSV, performs targeted code analysis per control, and produces a complete matrix marked COMPLIANT / NON_COMPLIANT / NOT_RELEVANT — with per-control reasoning and evidence (code snippets, file:line references, diagram observations). Outputs a reviewed CSV matrix and a self-contained HTML evidence 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。
Broad, pre-curation evidence reconnaissance for a declared Gaia skill, intake batch, upstream repository, or proposed generic capability. Run before choosing a discovery strategy or mapping topology, to give the curator independent research leads and counterevidence. Context only: never scores, grades, ratifies, ingests, or mutates the registry. Later ev-discovery and ev-pipeline phases validate/promote any selected leads.
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。
Close out a review/meta branch that lands an evidence-ingest / curation batch: create the named nodes, ingest verified evidence, appraise Trust Magnitude, calibrate stars, wire suites, correct upstream naming, stage ONLY the intended artifacts (dropping CRLF churn and blocking leaks), validate, and open the PR. Use when a curation/ingest batch is verified and ready to land, or when the user says "close the review/meta branch", "land the ingest batch", "wrap up the intake PR", "/gaia-review-meta-close". Wraps the deterministic hygiene in scripts/review_meta_close.py and gates the judgment calls (calibration, Origin, suite promotion, naming, merge) behind explicit human checkpoints.
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。
Post-review intake closing skill. After an intake is resolved (whether accepted via review/meta PR merge or rejected/deferred at triage/evidence review), run this skill to post standardized, personalized closing comments on the PR (if any) and each intake issue. Comments include: evidence pipeline findings with /trust-appraise TM output, per-row artifact scores, decisions rationale, path-to-promotion/acceptance guidance, and a mandatory badge status note including the universal Powered by Gaia badge. Use after curation completes, before or immediately after merge for accepted intakes, or immediately upon rejection.
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。
Phase 2 of the evidence verification pipeline. Validates GitHub star counts in registry skill files against live GitHub API data and flags stale or inflated metrics without repartitioning evidence by rank. Use this after /ev-collection has compiled the unified data lake and before /ev-adversarial-audit begins. Trigger phrases: "verify stars", "check star counts", "refresh stargazer metrics", "run star verification", "ev-star-verification", "Phase 2", "live star check".
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。
Phase 2B of the Gaia evidence verification pipeline. Verifies benchmark-result rows and benchmark-source candidates against registry/benchmark-sources.json before adversarial audit, link validation, catalog promotion, or ingestion. Use when running /ev-pipeline, checking benchmark-result evidence, reviewing benchmark-source candidates, or preparing benchmark rows for /gaia-ingest-batch.
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 essays, reports, literature reviews, dissertations, proposals, and source-backed assignments for high-score academic quality. Use when the user asks whether a paper can get a high grade, wants teacher/rubric feedback addressed, needs a pre-submission review, or needs checks for strict rubric compliance, academic standards, prompt/rubric alignment, argument quality, comparative analysis, evidence hierarchy, table/figure integration, citation specificity, conclusion strength, academic language, source-claim integrity, or evidence boundaries.
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 investigation harness for "why is this slow?" over a Pulp Perfetto trace (.pftrace). Runs the hypothesis→query→drill-down chain-of-evidence loop autonomously and returns a plain-English root cause + evidence + a concrete fix. TRIGGER on "why is my plugin slow to open", "find the slowest frames", "why is the UI stuttering", "why is my plugin using so much CPU", "which DSP node is expensive", "the load meter looks calm but CPU is pinned", or a named `pulp trace gpu-startup|gpu-health|gpu-probe` analysis. Ships Pulp-specific hints for dsp, frame, js, gpu, and cross-platform symptoms.
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 clear, reviewable audit workpaper documenting procedures, evidence, and conclusions. Use when an auditor says "write a workpaper", "document this audit procedure", "tick and tie this", "I need to document my testing", "substantive testing workpaper", "controls testing documentation", "audit evidence memo", "prepare the workpaper for this balance", "document the audit steps I performed", or needs to capture any audit work in a format that supports review and sign-off. Also trigger when someone has completed audit testing and needs to write it up even if they don't use the word "workpaper".
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。
FLOW framework integration: evidence-led SEO using the Find → Leverage → Optimize → Win loop. Surfaces stage-specific AI prompts from the FLOW knowledge base (41 prompts, CC BY 4.0). Use when user says "FLOW", "FLOW framework", "seo flow", "evidence-led SEO", "find leverage optimize win", or wants stage-specific SEO prompts.
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。
FLOW framework integration for bloggers. Evidence-led content workflow using the Find, Optimize, Win loop with stage-specific AI prompts from the FLOW knowledge base (30 blog-applicable prompts, CC BY 4.0). Use when user says "FLOW", "FLOW framework", "blog flow", "evidence-led blogging", "find optimize win", or wants stage-specific blog prompts.
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 citation readiness audit as part of SEO, covering classic Google search and AI search surfaces together. Use whenever the user wants their content to rank or be cited in ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, Copilot, You.com, Google AI Overviews, or Google AI Mode. AI citation optimization audit scoring blog posts for major answer surfaces. Evaluates evidence-backed citability, purpose clarity, entity clarity, structured data, and AI crawler accessibility. Suggests evidence-backed explanations and a 0-100 AI Citation Readiness score. Use when user says "geo", "ai citation", "ai optimization", "citation audit", "aeo", "perplexity optimization", "chatgpt citation".
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 Caveman Cloud evidence read-only: costs, Cave Score, Cave Plan, workflows, traces, latency, errors, compression, routing, and verified savings. Use when the user asks what Caveman found, where LLM spend goes, why cost or quality changed, which workflows need attention, or asks for a trace or analytics review. Prefer Caveman MCP tools; fall back to CLI JSON.
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。
Abductive reasoning about causes. Takes a phenomenon, separates observations from interpretations, then spawns diagnosticians applying different reasoning lenses (technical, human-factors, process, incentive-structure, environmental, temporal, measurement-artifact, statistical) in isolation. Orchestrator evaluates candidate causes for fit-against-evidence, calibrates confidence honestly, and reports leading candidate(s) with distinguishing evidence needed. Produces feedback only — no code, no tickets, no artifacts.
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。
serial-evidence-merge-target-parity
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。
v09-audit-evidence-map
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。
generic-session-resume-review-evidence-map
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。
Design, audit, harden, review, or upgrade MCP servers and MCP Apps with revision-aware protocol profiles, explicit HTTP/deployment boundaries, capability-centered validation, bilingual reporting, and reproducible evidence. Use for MCP server architecture, JSON-RPC or Streamable HTTP bugs, security hardening, protocol-version migration, MCP Apps widget boundaries, review reconciliation, test planning, and public engineering evidence.
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 current job markets and hiring requirements, analyze recent job descriptions (JDs), compare them with a user's resume, projects, skills, and constraints, and turn evidence gaps into prioritized career actions. Use when students, job seekers, or career changers ask about current role or industry outlook (including “现在行情怎么样”), whether a role or JD fits them (including “这个JD适合我吗”), cross-platform JD sampling, resume evidence gaps or truthful tailoring, what career skill to learn next, target-role course or certificate decisions, application readiness, or a capacity-bounded 30/60/90-day job-search plan. Do not use for unrelated personal or education advice, simple factual lookups, automatic job applications, or unsupported resume rewriting.
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 forensically auditing a Claude Code skill/agent/command/workflow library against RULESET.md by a fixed mechanical protocol — probing every file against the mechanically-checkable rules and reporting CONFORMS / VIOLATES / UNVERIFIABLE / N-A counts with quoted evidence. It casts NO judgment and emits NO pass/fail verdict; counts are the headline. Triggers on "investigate the library", "audit against RULESET", "find every violation", "forensic library audit", "evidence-only check". Not for routing/quality/single-responsibility judgment — use skill-library-review. Not the full sharded sweep — use the audit-library command.
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 litigation-grade case summaries for animal law disputes including cruelty/neglect prosecutions, ownership/custody, dangerous animal designations, veterinary malpractice, and service/assistance animal accommodations. Builds exhibit-cited factual timelines, maps evidence to statutory elements, evaluates expert evidence, and assesses remedies with jurisdiction-specific legal research. Use when summarizing animal law cases, analyzing animal cruelty charges, pet custody disputes, dangerous dog hearings, veterinary malpractice claims, or assistance animal accommodation matters. Also trigger for animal forfeiture, bite liability, wildlife possession, or animal-related court filings.
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 legal applications skill covering civil/criminal/administrative litigation workflows, trial defense strategies, legal document drafting (complaints, answers, appeals, retrial petitions, enforcement applications, representation opinions, defense statements, legal opinions, etc.), arbitration (commercial & labor), mediation, enforcement procedures, evidence rules, and litigation risk assessment. Trigger when users ask about: lawsuit/litigation/trial, legal documents, court defense, evidence/cross-examination, arbitration, enforcement, legal strategy, filing a case, appeal, retrial, representation, pleading, or any legal procedural guidance.
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 decision needs deep multi-source technical research with cited evidence — technology evaluation, ecosystem comparison, standards/spec fact-finding, "how do others solve X". Triggers on "research X", "deep dive on X", "evaluate X vs Y", "find best practices for X". NOT for library/API doc lookup (see mk:docs-finder); NOT for one-shot URL fetch (see mk:web-to-markdown); NOT for internal codebase discovery (see mk:scout); NOT for project-only Q&A (see mk:ask-me); NOT for comparing solution designs (see mk:brainstorming); NOT for root-cause debugging (see mk:investigate); NOT for wiki ingestion of sources (see mk:wiki-research).
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 problem requires structured step-by-step reasoning before acting. Prevents jumping to conclusions or guessing root causes without evidence. Triggers on complex debugging, multi-step analysis, hypothesis verification, or when mk:fix invokes diagnosis phase. NOT for being stuck on approach (too many implementations, forced assumptions, innovation block) — use mk:problem-solving instead.
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。