「report」の検索結果

Outbound SDR (Sales Development Representative) operating system that runs the full top-of-funnel motion across HubSpot (CRM, engagement, and source of truth) and Exa (web research + signals). Use this skill WHENEVER the user is doing outbound sales development, building target/prospect lists, defining or refining an ICP, enriching leads, researching accounts or people before outreach, writing cold emails or multi-touch sequences, qualifying or scoring leads, logging activity to CRM, handing meetings off to AEs, or reporting on pipeline. Trigger it even when the user only says things like "find me 50 leads", "research this account", "write a cold email to this person", "score these leads", "log this in HubSpot", or "build a sequence"; these are all SDR tasks this skill governs. Do not wait for the user to say "SDR" or "prospecting" explicitly.

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。

Fix data that has gone wrong and change shape without breaking what reads it: duplicates, nulls, inconsistent document shapes, a field that means two things, a column that has to change. Use when a report cannot be built because the data is not in the right shape, when duplicates, nulls or inconsistent shapes are producing wrong numbers, when a field is needed or has to change, before a migration, or when onboarding data from a new source that does not match the standard shape.

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。

Reporting workflow for a working journalist, using web research and Apify's X scraper (social signals). Onboards the journalist, monitors their beat and builds digests, evaluates story pitches, finds and vets sources, and prepares interviews. Use for any newsroom task, such as "what's new on my beat", "is this pitch any good", "who should I talk to about X", "prep me for this interview", or "turn these notes into a draft".

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 the Crabbox wrapper for OpenClaw remote validation across Linux, macOS, Windows, and WSL2, including delegated Blacksmith Testbox proof. Report the actual provider and id.

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。

Diagnose failures in SKMTC sessions — no output, wrong output, error messages, failed bundle builds, parseIssues, "Registered definition mismatch", ref cycles, "Module not found" in generated code, or any other broken behavior. Applies across both CLI usage and generator authoring contexts. Use this skill when the user asks "why isn't my generator working", "no output for X", "wrong output", "what does this error mean", "manifest says X", "bundle failed", "INVALID_SCHEMA", "INVALID_DEPENDENCY_REF", "Registered definition mismatch", "Module not found" (in generated code), "ConfigValidationError", or reports any other SKMTC failure. This skill encodes a **verify-first epistemic stance** — read the manifest, check parseIssues, reproduce the failure before proposing fixes. Distinct from `skmtc-cli` and `skmtc-generator` which guide *doing*; this skill guides *diagnosing*.

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。

Audits a Cloudflare application repository for code paths and configuration that may create usage-based billing exposure. Use when asked to inspect Cloudflare Worker, D1, Durable Objects, storage, queue, or compute usage for unexpected bills, billing risks, or cost drivers. Reports evidence and uncertainty. Runs offline by default; optionally correlates user-authorized, bounded evidence from existing official tools. Does not guarantee a spending cap.

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。

Red team tactics principles based on MITRE ATT&CK. Attack phases, detection evasion, reporting.

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。

Socratic questioning protocol + user communication. MANDATORY for complex requests, new features, or unclear requirements. Includes progress reporting and error handling.

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 QA test a web application. Use when asked to "qa", "QA", "test this site", "find bugs", "dogfood", or review quality. Four modes: diff-aware (automatic on feature branches — analyzes git diff, identifies affected pages, tests them), full (systematic exploration), quick (30-second smoke test), regression (compare against baseline). Produces structured report with health score, screenshots, and repro steps.

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。

Standard recovery patterns for all squad agents. When something fails, adapt — don't just report the failure.

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。

Qualitative quality review of game design documents — answers "is this design good, and does it follow best practices?" — across all three GDD axes: systems, flows, and content types. Fans out adversarial lenses (completeness, clarity, pillar alignment, systems-math, fantasy-delivery, feasibility, scope) plus domain lenses that check it against the game-design rules, each prompted to find problems rather than validate; produces a severity-graded verdict and a two-bucket report (apply-ready fixes vs research), handed to /unikit-gd-apply or /unikit-gd-explore in one move. Scope is inferred: a named system, flow, or content type reviews that document; "all" runs a cross-document review. Use when the user wants a critique, quality judgment, or rules check of the design, e.g. "review the combat GDD", "review the onboarding flow". This is the subjective quality pass — for a mechanical consistency check (numbers, terms, IDs, references matching the registry) use /unikit-gd-verify.

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。

Record a finding about the configured engine MCP server into .unikit/MCP-RECHECK-NOTES.md — the project's log of what has to be re-checked here. Use right after a call reported success while changing nothing, ate an argument, or validated a broken state, e.g. "write this down", "record this MCP finding", "the server lied — note it", "add a recheck note", "trap this". Takes three forms of input: the finding in one line, a path to a plan file (harvests the "## MCP Findings" table of that plan and nothing else), or nothing at all — then it takes findings already in the session first, and offers to scan the tables of plans touched since the last audit. The table only, never the plan body. Writes in the one allowed genre — a check to perform; never a lifted gate, never a named workaround, never a claim about what the server can or cannot do. Makes zero MCP calls and needs no editor. To replay, retire, or upstream existing notes use /unikit-mcp-audit 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。

Dispatch an explicit, user-dictated set of edits that spans TWO OR MORE zones of the GDD — the master spec, systems, content types, and flows — in one ordered pass. Writes nothing itself: it resolves each delta to its (target, zone), orders them so a system change lands before the content or flow that depends on it, delegates each to the owning skill (/unikit-gd-spec, /unikit-gd-system, /unikit-gd-content, /unikit-gd-flow), and closes with one /unikit-gd-verify pass. Use when you already know the changes and they touch more than one part of the design, e.g. "apply these GDD changes", "update the combat system and its loot and the boss flow". It also takes a /unikit-gd-review report file (applies its apply-ready bucket), and a bare /unikit-gd-apply reads the last /unikit-gd-verify output in the session. For a single-zone change call its owner directly; to research an open question use /unikit-gd-explore first.

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 and ideation partner for GAME DESIGN — think through design ideas before writing them into the GDD; produces a brief, never edits the GDD itself. Use to assess a genre or market for viability, dissect a reference game (mechanics → dynamics → aesthetics), explore how to improve or extend an existing system, flow, or content type, research new mechanics the design lacks, investigate a part of the GDD in code, or develop the research bucket of a /unikit-gd-review report into decided edits. Trigger on "explore how to improve the flow", "ways to improve the combat system", "is this genre saturated", "break down the combat of Hades", "work out the review's open questions". GAME-DESIGN research only — for CODE or technical research use /unikit-explore; to reconstruct a design from code use /unikit-gd-recon; to write a change into the GDD use /unikit-gd-system or /unikit-gd-spec; to apply edits you know use /unikit-gd-apply; to invent a new game use /unikit-gd-brainstorm.

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。

Good-faith divergent brainstorming for achieving a goal. Validates assumptions, then spawns brainstormers running different techniques (first-principles, working-backwards, lateral, analogical, constraints-shift, etc.) in isolation, and synthesizes the pool into a report of standouts, reasonable ideas, and hybrid combinations. 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。

Problem redefinition before problem solving. Takes a stated problem, extracts its premises, then spawns reframers applying different lenses (problem-vs-symptom, scope-shift, stakeholder-shift, level-of-abstraction, time-horizon, inversion, category-shift, constraints-shift) in isolation, and synthesizes the alternatives into a report with an orchestrator recommendation. 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。

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。

Mechanical git repo hygiene. Prunes stale remote-tracking refs, deletes merged local branches (with confirmation), and reports stashes, untracked files, and unpushed work. Never touches remote state. Safe by default — destructive operations require explicit operator approval.

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。

Good-faith adversarial scrutiny of an idea or plan. Spawns critical skeptics across relevant lenses, pairs them with an advocate defending the idea, and synthesizes the exchange into a report. 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。

Autonomous comprehensive review. Once-through pipeline over /review-health, /review-arch, /review-security, /review-perf, /review-a11y, /review-test, /review-release. Operator-configurable ticket creation at startup — when ON, auto-approves sub-skill ticket proposals per the orchestrator-family contract; when OFF, uniformly declines and surfaces findings in the consolidated report. Auto-detects sub-skills that do not apply (no web content → skip /review-a11y; no tests → skip /review-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。

Run a political science pre-submission audit with journal-aware personas, stage-aware standards, and evidence-grounded issue reporting.

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 gives a SaaS product's landing page URL, homepage, or name and asks for a full teardown or deep-dive of how the product works across web, desktop, and mobile — including per-platform feature inventories and user journeys, tech stack, pricing/plan mapping, how the platforms integrate and sync (and the business logic behind those choices), hardware integrations, business-scale/revenue signals, and concrete release artifacts per platform — with a structured Markdown report as the deliverable. Trigger on phrases like "research this SaaS", "do a platform teardown of X", "map every feature of this product across web/mobile/desktop", "reverse-engineer how this app works everywhere", or a bare URL plus a request to understand the whole product.

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。

Check the local environment for Spec Kit by running `specify check` (and `specify version`). USE FOR: verifying required tools are installed, diagnosing a broken spec-kit setup, reporting CLI version/feature capabilities. DO NOT USE FOR: installing or upgrading the CLI itself (use the speckit-self 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。

Codified expertise for electricity and gas procurement, tariff optimization, demand charge management, renewable PPA evaluation, and multi-facility energy cost management. Informed by energy procurement managers with 15+ years experience at large commercial and industrial consumers. Includes market structure analysis, hedging strategies, load profiling, and sustainability reporting frameworks. Use when procuring energy, optimizing tariffs, managing demand charges, evaluating PPAs, or developing energy strategies.

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。