「validity」の検索結果

Provide evidence-grounded mock peer review of scientific manuscripts or excerpts, covering significance, validity, and major/minor concerns. Use for 模拟审稿、投稿前自审、审稿人视角评估; not author rebuttal drafting.

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 for persistent semantic memory in agent systems: cross-session knowledge retention, entity tracking, temporal validity, graph or vector retrieval, memory consolidation, and memory benchmark selection. Route file-backed scratchpads to filesystem-context, handoff summaries to context-compression, and token-efficiency tactics to context-optimization.

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。

Validate and monitor OpenShell GitHub issues and PRs using the gator:* state machine. Use when asked to triage issues/PRs for project validity, gate PRs, run gator, validate submissions, or monitor PRs toward merge readiness.

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 an authorized security issue for validity, severity, and a remediation plan.

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 Claude Code instruction rules in .claude/rules/ and ~/.claude/rules/: frontmatter, paths glob validity against real files, symlink load status, and day-to-day usefulness, then update rules with the user. Use for first-time rules setup, rules that apply too often or never, or periodic rules hygiene. Not for Codex .rules command-approval files.

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 Claude Code and Codex hooks for validity, safety, and correctness across settings.json, hooks.json, config.toml, plugin, and skill or agent frontmatter hooks. Resolves each command, checks event names, handler types, matchers, exit-code and JSON decision strategy, and timeouts against each host's documented rules, then reviews hooks one by one. Use when setting up hooks, debugging a hook that never fires, never blocks, or hangs the agent, or doing a periodic hooks hygiene pass. Not for writing a new hook from scratch.

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。

Analyze PR review comments from a GitHub PR URL. Fetch review comments, verify each finding against the actual codebase, assess validity (correct/incorrect/partial), present a structured summary with recommended actions, and optionally reply to each comment on GitHub. Use when given a PR review URL or when asked to check/analyze PR 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。

Hunt SAML / SSO attacks. Patterns: XML Signature Wrapping (XSW) — modify Assertion while keeping Signature valid by relocating signed element, comment injection in NameID (admin@target.com<!--evil-->@attacker.com → some parsers see admin@target.com), signature stripping (remove Signature element entirely, server should reject but doesn't), key confusion (signed by attacker's IdP, accepted by SP), audience-restriction not validated, replay attack (same Assertion accepted twice within validity window). Tools: SAML Raider Burp extension, samlmagic, manual XML manipulation. Detection: any /saml endpoint, /Shibboleth.sso, /sso/saml/, Microsoft ADFS endpoints. Validate: account takeover via altered NameID, admin role injection via altered AttributeStatement. Use when hunting SSO flows, when SAML AssertionConsumerService is reachable, when chaining IdP-trust to SP-impersonation.

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。

Causal inference design audit for the sewage-house-prices project. Runs a 4-phase review (claim identification, design validity, inference, polish) covering hedonic pricing, repeat sales, long difference, DiD/event studies, upstream/downstream, and dry spill strategies. This skill should be used when asked to "check the econometrics", "audit the identification", "review the strategy", or when verifying that code matches the stated design.

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。

Agent D4 - Measurement Instrument Developer - Scale construction and psychometric validation. Covers item development, validity evidence, and reliability testing for social science 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。

Econometrics skill for instrumental variables and treatment effect estimation. Activates when the user asks about: "instrumental variables", "IV estimation", "2SLS", "two-stage least squares", "endogeneity", "weak instruments", "first stage", "Sargan test", "overidentification", "propensity score matching", "PSM", "average treatment effect", "ATT", "LATE", "local average treatment effect", "endogenous regressor", "instrument validity", "工具变量", "两阶段最小二乘", "内生性", "弱工具变量", "倾向得分匹配", "平均处理效应", "处理效应", "局部平均处理效应"

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 research rigor. Assess methodology, experimental design, statistical validity, biases, confounding, evidence quality (GRADE, Cochrane ROB), for critical analysis of scientific claims.

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。

Starter: interpret a council run's verdict artifacts — quorum, dissent, cross-lab validity, and what to do 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。

Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation. Use when writing formal peer reviews with specific criteria methodology assessment, statistical validity, reporting standards compliance (CONSORT/STROBE), and constructive feedback. Best for actual review writing, manuscript revision. For evaluating claims/evidence quality use scientific-critical-thinking; for quantitative scoring frameworks use scholar-evaluation.

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 scientific claims and evidence quality. Use for assessing experimental design validity, identifying biases and confounders, applying evidence grading frameworks (GRADE, Cochrane Risk of Bias), or teaching critical analysis. Best for understanding evidence quality, identifying flaws. For formal peer review writing use peer-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。

Evaluate scientific claims and evidence quality. Use for assessing experimental design validity, identifying biases and confounders, applying evidence grading frameworks (GRADE, Cochrane Risk of Bias), or teaching critical analysis. Best for understanding evidence quality, identifying flaws. For formal peer review writing use peer-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。

Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation. Use when writing formal peer reviews with specific criteria methodology assessment, statistical validity, reporting standards compliance (CONSORT/STROBE), and constructive feedback. Best for actual review writing, manuscript revision. For evaluating claims/evidence quality use scientific-critical-thinking; for quantitative scoring frameworks use scholar-evaluation.

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 retrieval and citation behavior for RAG pipelines from deterministic JSONL fixtures. Use when an agent needs offline Recall@K, reciprocal rank, context precision, citation coverage, citation validity, diagnostics, Markdown/JSON reports, or threshold-gated evaluation in CI.

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 per-molecule embeddings from any encoder-bearing KERMT checkpoint. Use a local checkpoint or optionally download a pinned Hugging Face model bundle using HF_TOKEN if configured. Run containerized embedding extraction and write model bundles, per-readout .npy embeddings, canonical SMILES, and validity arrays to user-selected host directories.

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 research rigor. Assess methodology, experimental design, statistical validity, biases, confounding, evidence quality (GRADE, Cochrane ROB), for critical analysis of scientific claims.

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 scientific claims and evidence quality. Use for assessing experimental design validity, identifying biases and confounders, applying evidence grading frameworks (GRADE, Cochrane Risk of Bias), or teaching critical analysis. Best for understanding evidence quality, identifying flaws. For formal peer review writing use peer-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。

Post-writing SEO validation with pass/fail checklist covering title tag length and keyword placement, meta description quality, heading hierarchy and keyword density, internal/external link audit with anchor text analysis, canonical URL verification, Open Graph meta tags (og:title, og:description, og:image), Twitter Card validation, structured data presence and validity, URL structure optimization, and image alt text presence. Produces prioritized fix list with specific recommendations. Use when user says "seo check", "check seo", "validate seo", "blog seo", "seo validation", "on-page seo", "title tag check", "meta description check", "heading check", "link audit".

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。

Designs a structured real-world evidence study using EHR, claims, or registry data, with explicit handling of time zero, eligibility windows, exposure definitions, outcome windows, censoring, confounding control, and target-trial-emulation logic. Use this skill when the user needs study-type design and protocol framing for an observational clinical study based on routine-care data. Do not invent database fields, follow-up completeness, linkage, coding validity, or causal identifiability.

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。

Classify XQUIC GitHub issues with an evidence-backed L1-L4 resolution-complexity label while keeping validity, priority, severity, and disposition separate and skipping uniquely labeled issues unless the user explicitly forces a recheck. Use when triaging one issue or a batch of issues, creating an issue-complexity backlog, or applying or correcting L1-L4 GitHub labels.

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。