「independently」の検索結果

Independently check whether an implementation matches its stated goal and return PASS/WARN/FAIL with actionable issues. Use for second-opinion validation of an implementation or generated output.

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。

Have Codex implement a concrete work order and have Claude independently inspect the final changes. Preserves the explicit Codex builder choice; use claudex-loop for host-based planning and automatic reviewer selection.

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。

Have Codex independently review an existing implementation plan while Claude coordinates a bounded revision loop. For automatic reviewer selection from either host, use claudex-loop with mode=review.

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 any question, idea, or decision through a council of 5 AI advisors who independently analyze it, peer-review each other anonymously, and synthesize a final verdict. Based on Karpathy's LLM Council methodology. MANDATORY TRIGGERS: 'council this', 'run the council', 'war room this', 'pressure-test this', 'stress-test this', 'debate this'. STRONG TRIGGERS (use when combined with a real decision or tradeoff): 'should I X or Y', 'which option', 'what would you do', 'is this the right move', 'validate this', 'get multiple perspectives', 'I can't decide', 'I'm torn between'. Do NOT trigger on simple yes/no questions, factual lookups, or casual 'should I' without a meaningful tradeoff (e.g. 'should I use markdown' is not a council question). DO trigger when the user presents a genuine decision with stakes, multiple options, and context that suggests they want it pressure-tested from multiple angles.

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。

When a constraint is treated as fixed, separate physics from convention, keep only independently supported primitives, and rebuild the simplest solution that satisfies real constraints.

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。

Breaks down complex software, writing, or research tasks into small, atomic, independently completable units with dependency graphs and milestone breakdowns. Use when the user asks to plan a project, decompose a feature, create subtasks, split up work, or needs help organizing a large piece of work into a step-by-step plan. Triggered by phrases like "break down", "decompose", "where do I start", "too big", "split into tasks", "work breakdown", or "task list".

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。

Extract factual claims from PR copy, verify each claim independently, attach concrete citations, and warn when certainty is low. Runs each claim through proven newsroom verification methods (lateral reading, source-tier climbing, provenance pillars, triangulation, calibrated rating) and puts the burden of proof on the speaker. Use before a pitch, press release, reactive comment, DM, or other journalist-facing draft is trusted or sent.

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。

Independently assess an RPI plan without editing it. Use when an implementation-ready plan needs a credibility check or a revised plan needs its earlier findings reconciled.

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。

Break large features into independently verifiable, human-reviewable slices under a feature directory in specs/. Use for risky or multi-step feature work that needs upfront questioning, API seams, browser-playable checkpoints, HTML visualizations, screenshot gates, staged implementation plans, recursive fog-of-war reslicing, or proactive research into reference implementations/best practices before slicing. Pairs with your project's verification harness and screenshot gates (the browser checkpoints), [refactor-clean](../refactor-clean/SKILL.md) (review the materialized spec so the plan describes one-owner architecture, not the feature bolted on), [screenshot-critique](../../visual/screenshot-critique/SKILL.md) and [compare-screenshots](../../visual/compare-screenshots/SKILL.md) (the visual gates), and a code-review pass (audit each slice before it lands).

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 two agents to research a design independently and converge on one specification through AMQ. Trigger for collaborative design or messages labeled workflow:spec; use amq-cli for ordinary coordination.

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。

Independently review the exact result and run its real checks in one context, using isolated resources and without changing the deliverable.

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 structural-review debate between two lenses — lowy (volatility-based decomposition) and hickey (structural simplicity) — on the current diff. Each reviews independently, then they cross-examine every finding until they agree per-finding, and the agreed fixes are applied. Use when the user types `/lens-debate`, or asks to "have lowy and hickey review this", "run the lens debate", "debate this diff structurally", or "argue the structure of this PR until the lenses agree".

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。

Multi-agent source security audit with a coverage ledger, independently verified findings, and machine-checked records. Use when asked to audit a codebase, find vulnerabilities, or run a source-level pen 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。

After scaffolded practice, run an unassisted check with no AI help. Use to distinguish supported performance from what the learner can currently do independently.

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。

Performs unbiased cell type recognition from single-cell RNA sequencing data, by leveraging reference transcriptomic datasets of pure cell types to infer the cell of origin of each single cell independently.

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-skill signal detector - finds entities or themes surfaced independently by 3+ different skill categories within 48h and surfaces them as high-confidence write opportunities

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 the user mentions Marketing Studio, DTC Ads, ad video, UGC video, the marketing_studio_video MCP model, or wants to generate one of the 9 Marketing Studio ad presets (UGC, Tutorial, Unboxing, Hyper Motion, Product Review, TV Spot, Wild Card, UGC Virtual Try On, Pro Virtual Try On). Also triggers on hook+setting picklist questions, preset-avatar / custom-avatar / text-generated-avatar handling, 4–15s ad video questions, or any reference to Higgsfield's ad-video product surface. Cross-surface workflow handoffs (GPT Image 2.0 / Soul Cinema / Nano Banana Pro / ms_image image gen → Marketing Studio video) covered in the companion cross-surface-workflow.md. Also use for Ad Multiplier (`ad_multiplier` — 'multiply my ad', many independently edited versions of one supplied 4–30s ad) and for Genjutsu one-off edits of a finished ad (swap one object / product / garment → `hf_mult_replace_object`; transfer motion → `hf_mult_motion_control`).

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。

Read one conversation window and return every independently mutable claim it states, one record each, with who or what it is about, whether it happened or stands, and the words that carry its time. Used by the memory extraction model on every conversation window; the engine resolves dates, validates keys, and repairs format.

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。

Break a plan, spec, or conversation into dependency-aware, independently verifiable tickets. Use explicitly when the user wants work sliced for local planning or an issue tracker.

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。

Break a plan, spec, or PRD into independently-grabbable issues on the project issue tracker using tracer-bullet vertical slices. Use when user wants to convert a plan into issues, create implementation tickets, or break down work into issues.

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。

Adjudicates authorized exercise outcomes against independently held ground truth, redacted evidence, and explicit status boundaries. Use when comparing observations, resolving discrepancies, or preparing evidence-led security-review handoffs.

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。

Final arbiter for Bug Hunter. Receives Hunter findings and Skeptic challenges, independently re-reads code, and delivers authoritative verdicts with CVSS scoring and proof-of-concept generation for security findings.

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 survey prose into per-section files under `sections/` so each unit can be QA'd independently before merging.

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。

Answer a hard question by fanning it out to a PANEL of models running in parallel — each answering independently with web search and bash, none seeing the others' work — then having Opus 4.8 judge every response into a structured analysis (consensus, contradictions, partial coverage, unique insights, blind spots) and write a final answer grounded in it. The panel is two independent Opus 4.8 runs (slug opus4.8-4.8), Opus 4.8 + GPT-5.5 via codex (opus4.8-gpt5.5), Opus 4.8 + Gemini 3.1 Pro via agy (opus4.8-gemini3.1pro), or all three (opus4.8-gpt5.5-gemini3.1pro). Opus always judges and writes the final answer — the pipeline can't be reversed. Runs on local CLI subscriptions (no metered API), and saves a timestamped provenance .md per run. Use this whenever the user asks to "run it through Fusion", says /fusion, wants a multi-model / panel / ensemble answer, wants a question cross-checked across models, or wants a higher-confidence answer with consensus and blind spots surfaced — even if they don't say "fusion". General-purpose: any topic (research, law, strategy, technical, personal). Best for high-stakes research, design calls, and debugging where being confidently wrong is expensive.

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。