57 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Configure and manage MCP (Model Context Protocol) servers in Claude Code CLI. Use this skill when adding, removing, listing, or troubleshooting MCP servers, or when questions arise about MCP configuration, transport types, scopes, or authentication. Essential for connecting Claude Code to external tools, databases, and APIs.
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。
Add an external probabilistic classifier to a decision path without letting it take the path over. Covers finding the externally-graded rows you are already logging, measuring the confidence separation between the overrides it got right and the ones it got wrong, choosing an operating point your data licenses, failing open at the call site, and proving the whole arrangement offline with no API key. Applies to any service returning a score you can order — TypeSafe AI's System One models (Jev) are the worked example. Most of the method transfers to a local model or a second heuristic, with the parts that do not called out where they arise. Use when a rule-based path is wrong often enough to hurt, when someone proposes replacing a heuristic with a model, when a confidence threshold needs a defensible value, or when an oracle already in production has never been graded.
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。
Query the Precision Medicine Knowledge Graph (PrimeKG) for multiscale biological relationships across genes and proteins, drugs, diseases, phenotypes, pathways, biological processes, exposures and anatomy. Use this skill to search entities by name, pull direct neighbours and their evidence types, summarise the local network around a disease, and find direct or two-hop drug-disease connections for repurposing hypotheses. Also trigger on PrimeKG, kg.csv, Harvard Dataverse knowledge graph, disease_protein, drug_protein, indication and contraindication edges, or network pharmacology over a biomedical knowledge graph.
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 dual-process theory to diagnose whether judgments arise from fast intuitive (System 1) or slow analytical (System 2) processing and identify resulting cognitive biases. Use this skill when the user needs to explain why quick decisions go wrong, design choice architectures that account for cognitive defaults, audit decision processes for heuristic errors, or when they ask 'why do people misjudge probability', 'how to reduce snap-judgment errors', or 'when does intuition fail'.".
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 the current session's status so a human can see where things stand and what happens next. Use when the user invokes `/sq`, asks for the status quo, session status, a catch-up, recap, or reminder where things got to, regardless of how much previous output there was.
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。
Fetch and extract readable text content from a URL, then summarise or present key information.
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 session — summarise what changed, capture what was learned, and prepare the commit.
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。
Clarify requirements before implementing. Use when serious doubts arise.
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 Endocrine Society recommends a standard-dose corticotropin (ACTH) stimulation test to confirm primary adrenal insufficiency when clinical suspicion arises from symptoms such as hypotension, hyponatremia, hyperkalemia, or unexplained fatigue. Dosing is weight/age based: 250 µg for adults and children ≥2 years, 15 µg/kg for infants, and 125 µg for children <2 years.
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。
Recommends diagnostic testing to exclude primary adrenal insufficiency (PAI) in acutely ill patients presenting with otherwise unexplained volume depletion, hypotension, hyponatremia, hyperkalemia, fever, abdominal pain, hyperpigmentation, or hypoglycemia (especially in children). Use when clinical suspicion arises from these suggestive signs or symptoms suggestive of PAI.
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。
Suggests reducing the fludrocortisone dose in patients who develop new-onset hypertension while on fludrocortisone replacement for primary adrenal insufficiency. Consider dose reduction when hypertension arises alongside signs of mineralocorticoid excess such as edema, weight gain, or hypokalemia.
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。
Atonement is an expression of care that may arise in an intelligence when its actions contribute to harm.
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。
Clarify requirements before implementing. Use when serious doubts arise.
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。
Drafts one weekly status update or team status email (done, in progress, blocked, next, asks) from the notes, task lists, tracker exports and messages the user attaches, pastes or makes reachable, every bullet traced to a source and every gap marked UNKNOWN, returned in the chat as Markdown for the user to review and send. Use when the user asks to "write my weekly status update", "draft the team status email", "turn my notes into a status report", "what did we get done this week", "summarise this week for my manager" or "prepare Friday's update". Do not use for maintaining a project's living logs or a project-level report built from them, use project-status-tracker 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。
Drafts a DRAFT self-assessment, peer feedback note or manager review narrative from the evidence the writer supplies (goals, examples, metrics, notes), in the review template where given: every sentence tied to a numbered evidence item, unsupported claims removed and logged, and a gaps list to complete before submitting. Never assigns, suggests or implies a rating, score, ranking, pay or promotion outcome. Use when the user asks to "write my self-assessment", "draft peer feedback for a colleague", "turn these notes into a performance review", "help me write the year-end review for my report", "summarise my achievements against my goals" or "draft the mid-year review". Do not use for a job description or role profile, use job-description-drafter instead; for a new hire's first 90 days, use onboarding-plan-builder. 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。
Synthesises training survey responses and manager notes into a DRAFT training needs report by role: coded needs with record counts per role (n of N), the evidence type behind each count, anonymised quotes cited to record codes, disagreements between what staff report and what managers observe, gaps where a role is under-represented or a required skill has no evidence, and follow-up questions to settle before any course is designed. Never rates an individual, ranks a team or turns a count into a competence verdict. Use when the user asks to "analyse this training survey", "what training do our teams need", "summarise the manager feedback on skills gaps", "build a training needs analysis by role" or "which roles have the biggest skill gaps". Do not use for turning an agreed need into a course, use course-outline-builder instead; for exit interviews, use exit-interview-synthesis. 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。
Abstracts one contract into a key-terms table with clause references, compares each term against the user's playbook of standard positions, and returns a DRAFT contract review pack: deviations and issues, open questions and a reviewer checklist. Flags governing law and never gives legal advice or enforceability or acceptability calls. Use when the user asks to "review this contract", "abstract the key terms", "summarise this MSA", "pressure-test this SOW against our playbook" or to compare an agreement with their standard positions. Do not use for a first pass on a stand-alone NDA, use nda-triage instead, or for one clause lined up across several documents, use clause-comparison-table 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。
Compares a changed HR policy with the version it replaces and drafts a clause-by-clause change log, a plain-language DRAFT employee briefing, a manager FAQ answered only from the policy text with clause references, and a list of open questions the people team must settle before release. Use when the user asks to explain, announce, summarise or brief a policy change, a new policy version or an updated handbook section, or says "what changed in the leave policy", "brief managers on the new handbook section" or "compare the old and new versions of this policy". Do not use for a single announcement with no version comparison, use announcement-drafter instead; for an FAQ from documents that are not a policy change, use faq-builder; for contract clauses, use clause-comparison-table. 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。
Synthesises a batch of customer feedback (survey answers, reviews, ticket and chat comments) into a DRAFT themed report: coded themes with record counts and shares, anonymised verbatim quotes cited to record codes, contradictions and unverified claims, and the follow-up questions to answer next. Produces no sentiment score or percentage positive as fact; ratings appear only as distributions with n. Use when the user asks to "theme this feedback", "what are customers saying", "summarise these survey answers", "analyse these reviews", "find the top complaints in these comments" or "code this voice of the customer data". Do not use for exit interviews, use exit-interview-synthesis instead; for sorting a live queue and drafting replies, use ticket-triage-pack; for project retrospectives, use lessons-learned-synthesis. 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。
Prepares a DRAFT leadership-meeting briefing pack from the reports, meeting notes, emails and dashboard exports the user provides: one headline, metrics exactly as stated with period and source, decisions the meeting must take, risks as reported, talking points with anticipated questions, a source reference on every line and UNKNOWN where the material is silent. Use when the user asks to "brief the leadership team", "prepare the exec pack", "pull together a briefing for the steering committee", "summarise these reports for the CEO", "what do I tell the board on Monday" or "build the pre-read for the management meeting". Do not use for a formal board or committee paper seeking a resolution, use board-paper-skeleton instead; for a personal one-page prep drawn from the user's own calendar and inbox, use meeting-prep-onepager. 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。
Reads one spreadsheet, CSV export or pasted table together with the user's question and drafts an insight pack: a data profile, observations cited to named columns and values and framed as leads, caveats, and suggested charts and follow-up analyses. Every figure carries the label "as read, verify in source"; correlation is never stated as causation. Use when the user asks to "profile this spreadsheet", "what does this data say", "find anomalies in this extract", "give me a first read on this CSV" or "summarise this table". Do not use for a purchase order log or spend extract, use purchase-order-anomaly-review instead; for actuals versus budget, use budget-variance-explainer instead; for a report that arrives by email on a schedule, use report-attachment-analyzer 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。
Turns one long support ticket thread (helpdesk history, email chain, chat transcript, call notes) into a one-page DRAFT escalation summary: the customer's ask in their own words, account context as stated, a dated history, what was tried and the stated result of each attempt, the current state, and what is needed from whom by when, every line referenced to a message and every missing fact marked UNKNOWN. Use when the user asks to "escalate this ticket", "summarise this thread for tier two", "write the hand-over for this case", "what has been tried so far", "brief engineering on this customer issue" or "prepare the escalation note". Do not use for a batch of tickets, use ticket-triage-pack instead; for the review after an outage, use incident-postmortem-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。
Clarify requirements before implementing. Use when serious doubts arise.
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。