「uat」の検索結果

Manage a stateful, run-directory-based proof project with Codex: continuation across runs, run-local source bookkeeping, manual GPT Pro handoff packages when a local attempt stalls, and an optional DeepSeek second opinion as additional evidence only. Use when the user asks for proof-run orchestration, a GPT Pro handoff, or cross-run proof continuation — use /proof-writer for ordinary proof drafting and /proof-checker for rigorous verification or submission acceptance.

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 a stateful, run-directory-based proof project: continuation across runs, run-local source bookkeeping, manual GPT Pro handoff packages when a local attempt stalls, and an optional DeepSeek second opinion as additional evidence only. Use when the user asks for proof-run orchestration, a GPT Pro handoff, or cross-run proof continuation — use /proof-writer for ordinary proof drafting and /proof-checker for rigorous verification or submission acceptance.

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。

Provides guidance for automatically evolving and optimizing AI agents across any domain using LLM-driven evolution algorithms. Use when building self-improving agents, optimizing agent prompts and skills against benchmarks, or implementing automated agent evaluation loops.

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。

Cross-phase audit of all outstanding UAT and verification 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。

Help engineers evaluate a local skill or plugin, explain why it scored that way, show what to fix first, measure real token usage, benchmark starter scenarios, or decide what to run next. Use when the user says things like "evaluate this skill", "give me an analysis of the game dev skill", "why did this score that way", "what should I fix first", "measure the real token usage of this skill", or "what should I run next?".

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。

Route Public Equity Investing workflows for listed-company and public-security research, earnings analysis, valuation, model updates, long/short pitches, catalysts, thesis tracking, ETF/index and constituent diligence, position sizing, hedging, dashboards, and investment memos. Use when the user is evaluating a public company, ticker, sector, portfolio position, event, earnings setup, or investment thesis through an investor lens, including what is priced in, what is mispriced, what proves or kills the thesis, and what to watch next. Do not use for private-company diligence, credit-first analysis, personal financial advice, generic company summaries, or generic document drafting with no public-equity investment context.

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 custom metric packs for plugin-eval so teams can add local evaluation rubrics that emit schema-compatible checks and metrics. Use when the user wants their own evaluation criteria or visualizations.

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 a repo agent harness (AGENTS.md, rules, skills, skill refs) for broken paths/commands, redundant instructions, and usefulness using a stack-agnostic dual-judge protocol with planted traps. HIGH PRIORITY questionnaires at top: Q1 optional docs, Q2 B/C budget before Track A (certainty/tokens). A always runs after Q2; B/C opt-in. ADRs/RFCs excluded from T2. Mixed apply uses 11-mixed-apply.md (KEEP/CUT). Use when the user says harness eval, harness-eval, harness debug, audit AGENTS.md, audit skills/rules, instruction audit, redundancy of agent instructions, usefulness of skills, Ship/Review/Hold/Slim/Keep-core for harness, or wants Track A/B/C harness evaluation. Do NOT use for harness setup or init, feature spec-driven work (tlc-spec-driven), or applying Ship/Slim trims unless the user explicitly asks after the 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。

Darwin Skill 2.0 (达尔文.skill 2.0): autonomous skill optimizer, v2.0 integrates Microsoft Research SkillLens (arXiv 2605.23899) 9-dim rubric + SkillOpt (arXiv 2605.23904) validation-gated design + human-in-the-loop checkpoints. Evaluates SKILL.md files using a 9-dimension rubric (structure + effectiveness + meta-skill blacklists), runs hill-climbing with git version control, spawns independent judge agents for blind evaluation, validates improvements through test prompts with auto-break on diminishing returns, and generates visual result cards. Use when user mentions "优化skill", "skill评分", "自动优化", "auto optimize", "skill质量检查", "达尔文", "darwin", "帮我改改skill", "skill怎么样", "提升skill质量", "skill review", "skill打分".

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 execution with three-stage verification pipeline

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。

This skill should be used when the user asks to "analyze skill quality", "evaluate this skill", "review skill quality", "check my skill", or "generate quality report". Evaluates local skills across description quality, content organization, writing style, and structural integrity.

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。

Scaffolds eval.yaml evaluation specs for skills, custom agents, and redistributable gh-aw workflow packages in the dotnet/skills repository. Use when creating skill or workflow-package tests, writing evaluation stimuli, defining graders and rubrics, sizing an eval for statistical power, or setting up test fixture files. Handles the Vally eval.yaml schema, fixture organization, and overfitting avoidance. Do not use for running or debugging existing evals (use improve-skill-quality) nor for skills authoring (use create-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。

Diagnoses and fixes skills in the dotnet/skills repository that lose to their own baseline, fail to activate, time out, or return "no credible improvement". Use when an evaluation verdict is a regression or underpowered, when a skill regressed after a change, when /evaluate reports no results, or when deciding whether a weak skill should be strengthened or retired. Do not use for scaffolding a brand-new skill (use create-skill) or a brand-new eval (use create-skill-test).

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 way to answer "how are my production AI agents doing?" and to run the team's agent-observability deployment — reach for it even on casual phrasing that names no tool. Trigger when the user wants to: • inspect agent telemetry — did agents error/fail/go flaky; sessions, events, latency, token usage, slowest models; eval/quality scores and whether quality dropped; • operate the deployment — ack/assign/resolve/mute/dismiss issues (alerts, reports, and audit findings) with notes; run and triage audits; see who has access and change roles (e.g. read-only); create or scope API keys (e.g. a push-only CI key); change settings; run saved or ad-hoc ClickHouse queries. Served by the `fp` CLI against FailproofAI Cloud. NOT for writing or designing an evaluator service / scoring logic (that's `agenteye-evaluator`), adding SDK/instrumentation to your app (that's `failproofai-sdk`, imported as `failproofai_sdk`), debugging the collector/daemon, or unrelated dev work (why a build/CI run failed, rotating non-FailproofAI Cloud secrets).

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。

External recon for software supply-chain attack surface — package-namespace squatting candidates, dependency-confusion vulnerabilities, GitHub Actions injection openings, container image registry exposure, SBOM mining, internal-package-name leakage, and CI/CD configuration exposure. Reconnaissance and identification ONLY — actual package publishing / typosquat attacks are EXTERNAL-OFFENSIVE and require explicit written sign-off because they can affect the entire npm/PyPI ecosystem. Use when the target has a public GitHub org, when their build artifacts/SBOMs are reachable, when their docker images are on Docker Hub/GHCR, or when you find internal package names in their JS bundles.

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。

Log exercise reps for the Peon Trainer. Use when user says they did pushups, squats, or wants to log reps. Examples - "/peon-ping-log 25 pushups", "/peon-ping-log 30 squats", "log 50 pushups".

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 the user asks to "analyze skill quality", "evaluate this skill", "review skill quality", "check my skill", or "generate quality report". Evaluates local skills across description quality, content organization, writing style, and structural integrity.

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。

Assesses a research paper outline (.qmd file) against structured criteria from Kosuke Imai's empirical research guide. Evaluates the abstract and section outline for: research question clarity, stated contributions, hypotheses and testable implications, data description, planned results and inferential approach, and robustness checks. Detects causal papers from the abstract and conditionally assesses identification strategy only when causal framing is present. Produces a structured markdown report with PASS/PARTIAL/FAIL assessments and actionable suggestions. Use when asked to assess, evaluate, review, or check a paper outline, abstract-and-outline, or research plan in a .qmd file.

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。

Apply the ScholarEval framework to systematically evaluate scholarly work across quality dimensions (novelty, rigor, significance, and clarity). Use to critique academic papers, research proposals, literature reviews, or grant applications and produce a structured, criterion-based assessment.

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。

Systematically evaluate scholarly work using the ScholarEval framework, providing structured assessment across research quality dimensions including problem formulation, methodology, analysis, and writing with quantitative scoring and actionable feedback.

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。

Single-page SEO audit: content quality under Google's E-E-A-T framework and Helpful Content guidelines, on-page factors, search intent, technical signals and readability. Pulls GSC data for the page, crawls the live HTML, checks metadata, schema, internal linking and depth, and produces a scored report with fixes. Use whenever the user wants to analyze a specific page or URL, not the whole site. Trigger on: "analyze this page", "audit this URL", "how is this page doing", "evaluate my blog post", "check this landing page", "page SEO", "content quality check", "is this page good enough", "review this page's SEO", "what's wrong with this page", "how can I improve this page", "page analysis", "single page audit", "content audit for [URL]", or any request naming a specific URL/page for SEO evaluation. If the user provides a specific URL (not just a domain), this is likely the right skill; use /seo-analysis for full-site audits 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。

Systematically evaluate scholarly work using the ScholarEval framework, providing structured assessment across research quality dimensions including problem formulation, methodology, analysis, and writing with quantitative scoring and actionable feedback.

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。

LQF Machine Learning Expert Guide - Routed skill for ML/Statistical Modeling with Critical Discussion Mode. Triggers on: machine learning, modeling, prediction, training, classification, regression, clustering, deep learning, neural network, model evaluation, feature engineering, hyperparameter tuning, overfitting, underfitting, baseline, ablation study, critique my approach, review my model, is this a good idea, should I use, what's wrong with, evaluate my solution, challenge my assumptions, discuss my approach Engages in critical discussion with minimum 3 rounds of iterative refinement. Challenges both user proposals and own suggestions with fact-based critique. Demands evidence and baselines before accepting solutions.

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。