863 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
ATAC-seq library quality control -- TSS enrichment, FRiP, fragment-size periodicity, library complexity (NRF/PBC1/PBC2), mitochondrial fraction, and ENCODE 4 thresholds. Use when assessing whether an ATAC-seq library passes ENCODE acceptance criteria, diagnosing transposition artefacts, comparing Omni-ATAC vs standard prep quality, or selecting which replicates to drop before peak calling.
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。
UE (user experience engineering) skill for defining end-to-end user experience behavior and interaction logic. Use for tasks like flow design, interaction models, state machines, error recovery, input validation, usability heuristics, accessibility, and turning UX intent into testable acceptance criteria for implementation.
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。
Translate a vague request or GitHub issue into a concrete, testable spec using five structured elements (problem, scope, acceptance criteria, edge cases, success criterion) before writing any code. Prevents scope creep, PR churn, and mid-implementation pivots.
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。
Five-phase pipeline (triage → clarify → research → PRD → plan) that turns a raw idea into four linked files: clarifying questions, deep research, a PRD with non-goals and metrics, and a phased execution plan with mermaid user journey and kill criteria.
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。
Generate structured lead lists from prospect databases and web directories with Firecrawl browser. Use for finding prospects by role, company type, industry, stage, location, technologies, or other criteria and exporting CRM-ready JSON or CSV.
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。
Produce a multi-quarter QA strategy document. Covers scope, risk-based prioritization, test levels (unit/integration/E2E), pyramid analysis, entry/exit criteria, quality KPIs, tool selection rationale, CI scaling levers, and timeline planning. Output is an actionable strategy document, not a shelf document. Use when: "test strategy," "QA strategy doc," "testing approach," "QA roadmap," "multi-quarter QA direction." Not for: a single-sprint or single-release plan — use test-planning. Not for: identifying which areas carry the most risk — use risk-based-testing first. Related: risk-based-testing, qa-metrics, release-readiness, test-planning, test-reliability.
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 release readiness with evidence-based go/no-go decisions. Covers go/no-go checklists, smoke test suite design, staged rollout validation, rollback criteria and procedures, and post-deployment verification. Ensures release confidence comes from data, not feelings. Use when: "release ready," "go/no-go," "smoke test," "release checklist," "rollback plan," "staged rollout," "canary deploy." Not for: safe-release techniques (flags, canary, dark launch) applied during the rollout itself — use testing-in-production; scheduled probes that run continuously after release — use synthetic-monitoring; designing new tests from prod telemetry — use observability-driven-testing. Related: testing-in-production, qa-metrics, ci-cd-integration, ai-system-testing.
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。
Author and maintain MANUAL and hybrid test cases and suites in TestRail, Xray (Jira), Zephyr Scale, and Qase. Covers test-case anatomy (title, preconditions, steps, expected results, test data), suite/section organization, bulk authoring from user stories and acceptance criteria, ambiguous-step linting, CSV/API import-export payloads per tool, requirement traceability and coverage gaps, review hygiene, and when a manual case should graduate to automation. Use when: "write a test case," "manual test case," "TestRail case," "Xray test," "Zephyr Scale case," "Qase case," "import CSV into TestRail," "lint these steps," "traceability report," "should this be automated." Not for: Generating automated TEST CODE — that is ai-test-generation. Sprint-level WHAT-to-test selection — that is test-planning. Related: ai-test-generation, test-planning, exploratory-testing, qa-project-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。
Execute implementation within EPICs following test-first development, continuous SoT updates, and code traceability during PRD v0.7 Build Execution. Triggers on requests to start building, implement an epic, begin coding, or when user asks "start building", "implement epic", "coding", "development", "build execution", "implementation", "write code". Consumes EPIC- (context), TEST- (acceptance criteria). Updates existing IDs and creates code. Outputs working code with @implements traceability tags.
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。
Validates gate criteria before PRD lifecycle advancement by delegating to the readiness scoring pipeline (scripts/readiness.py). Returns a graduated PASS / WARN / BLOCK verdict with top blockers and their causal chain. Triggers before advancing from v0.X to v0.Y or explicit `/ghm-gate-check`.
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。
Define lifecycle stages and marketing → sales / CSM handoff rules for leads captured by GTM channels during PRD v0.8 Deployment & Ops. Triggers on requests to set up lead lifecycle, define MQL/SQL criteria, build handoff process, or when user asks "what's an MQL?", "marketing to sales handoff", "lead lifecycle", "lead routing", "RevOps", "MOPS", "marketing operations". Outputs BR-MOPS-* lifecycle rules and GTM-MOPS-* handoff flow entries.
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。
Define test cases BEFORE implementation, ensuring every API, business rule, and user journey has verifiable acceptance criteria during PRD v0.7 Build Execution. Triggers on requests to define tests, plan test coverage, create test cases, or when user asks "define tests", "test planning", "what to test?", "test cases", "test coverage", "TEST-", "test-first". Consumes EPIC- (scope), API-, DBT-, BR-, UJ-. Outputs TEST- entries with Given-When-Then format. Feeds v0.7 Implementation Loop.
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。
Define measurable success metrics (KPIs) tied to product type during PRD v0.3 Commercial Model. Triggers on requests to define success metrics, set KPI targets, determine what to measure, establish go/no-go thresholds, or when user asks "how do we measure success?", "what metrics matter?", "what's our target?", "how do we know if this works?", "define KPIs", "success criteria". Consumes Product Type Classification (BR-) from v0.2. Outputs KPI- entries with thresholds, evidence sources, and downstream gate linkages.
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。
Generate a structured implementation plan from an evidence draft. Validate paths, obtain configured independent Codex and Qoder reviews, synthesize available advice against repository evidence, preserve the draft, and produce testable acceptance criteria and validation 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。
Iterative task completion loop with Definition of Done verification. Combines the Ralph Wiggum technique (prompt re-injection via Stop hook) with DoD-based independent verification. Claude proposes DoD criteria, user confirms, then Claude works autonomously. Stop hook re-injects the original prompt and blocks exit until all DoD items are independently verified. "/ralph", "ralph loop", "ralph 루프", "반복 작업", "DoD 루프", "완료 검증 루프", "task loop", "keep going until done"
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 the public interface of a module before any implementation exists: writes the caller scenarios first, produces three candidates with genuinely different shapes, type-checks each one against the scenarios, scores them on measurable criteria and records the decision. Use when someone says "design the API for this module", "what should this signature look like", "compare interface options", "this function is awkward to call", "show me alternatives before I build it", or is about to add a module, library entry point, endpoint or command that other code will depend on.
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。
You are an expert in Clay, the data enrichment and outbound sales platform that pulls from 75+ data providers to build rich prospect profiles. You help teams automate lead discovery, enrich contacts with firmographic and technographic data, score leads against ICP criteria, and trigger personalized outreach sequences — replacing manual research with automated, data-driven prospecting.
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。
Expert in course platform selection and implementation - comparing Teachable, Kajabi, Thinkific, and custom solutions. Covers LMS selection criteria, platform migrations, tech stack decisions, and building vs buying. Use when "course platform, lms, teachable, kajabi, thinkific, course hosting, learning management system, which platform, " mentioned.
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。
Expert in decision-making frameworks - systematic approaches to making better decisions under uncertainty. Covers decision criteria, reversibility assessment, stakeholder alignment, and decision documentation. Knows when to decide fast and when to deliberate. Use when "decision framework, how to decide, making a choice, tradeoff, should we, pros and cons, decision matrix, weighing options, " mentioned.
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。
Validates PRD, user stories, or feature requirements against SMART criteria. Use when reviewing requirements to catch vagueness before it causes expensive rework.
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。
Generates a behavioral scenario acceptance matrix for comprehensive test coverage planning. Maps user scenarios to acceptance criteria with stable IDs. Use when planning test coverage for a complex feature, before a release or milestone review, or when someone asks what is tested.
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。
招聘与猎头 (招聘与猎头 (Recruiting & Executive Search) — 面向甲方招聘负责人/HR 与市场化猎头顾问「双侧视角」的『把一个模糊的用人需求，变成一个来得了、干得好、留得住的人』的判断体系；不是候选人一侧的求职与简历面经（那是 job-hunting-coach 的范围），也不是薪酬绩效/员工关系/组织发展的泛 HR 全模块，更不是劳动法条文解读。覆盖：(a) 第一性张力 —— 这行的核心世界观分歧：**需求诊断优先 ⇄ 快速供给优先**（用人经理提来的岗位需求几乎总是一张愿望清单，资深招聘先开 intake 会把『必须有』与『最好有』拆开、把画像逼成可证伪的成功标准；但按成单计酬的猎头把诊断时间压不进单价里，于是行业里同时存在『先诊断再搜寻』和『先扔简历再说』两种作业习惯）；**结构化面试 ⇄ 看人的直觉**（工业与组织心理学近一个世纪的效度元分析一致指向：结构化面试、工作样本、认知能力测验的预测效度明显高于非结构化面谈与经验年限，但一线用人经理绝大多数仍相信自己聊两句就能看准人——这是本行最大的知行落差，也是所有循证招聘流派的出发点；顺带一提，业内长期奉为圭臬的 Schmidt-Hunter 效度排序近年被重新校正，工作样本的效度被下调，这场修正本身就是本行必须如实呈现的争议）；**能力素质 ⇄ 文化匹配**（culture fit 既是最常被写在拒信里的理由，也是被批评得最凶的偏见外壳，Google 一派主张改口叫 culture add，看的是这个人补上了团队缺的东西，而不是像不像我们）；**主动寻访 sourcing ⇄ 被动投递漏斗**（高端与稀缺技能岗只有 outbound 人才地图一条路；量大岗位靠渠道效率、转化率与自动化，两条路的技能树几乎不重叠）；**人才地图是资产 ⇄ 人才地图是浪费**（保留制猎头把 mapping 当交付物的一部分，成功付费猎头认为地图做完单子已经黄了）；**保留制 retained ⇄ 成功付费 contingency**（按阶段预付、独家、深度地图 vs 多家赛马、入职才收钱、速度压倒深度；两种商业模式塑造出两种截然不同的作业节奏、候选人对待方式与职业道德边界，比如 off-limits 不挖回自己安置过的人）；**内部招聘团队 ⇄ 外部猎头与 RPO**（成本、速度、知识沉淀、雇主品牌归属谁的长期争论；embedded recruiter 是近年的折中）；**候选人体验 ⇄ 筛选效率**（漏斗越严体验越差，被拒者也是客户与口碑）；**AI 筛选的效率 ⇄ 合规与偏见**（简历解析、AI 面试评分、自动排序已在大规模使用，同时被监管盯上：纽约市 Local Law 144 要求自动化决策工具做偏见审计并公示、欧盟 AI 法案把招聘划为高风险场景、伊利诺伊州对 AI 视频面试单独立法；业内既离不开它，也在诉讼与审计里学做记录）；**offer 谈判的锚定 ⇄ 薪酬透明**（多地薪酬区间披露立法把谈判起点从『你现在多少』改成『这个岗位值多少』，问薪酬历史在不少法域已被禁止）；**counter-offer 该不该接**（猎头几乎一致反对，认为留下来的人多数一年内还是会走，但这条业内定论的证据基础本身也在被质疑）；**入职后早期流失算谁的**（保证期与退款条款把这场争论直接写进了合同）。(b) 工具栈 —— 申请人追踪系统 ATS（Greenhouse、Lever、Ashby、Workday Recruiting、SmartRecruiters、iCIMS、Taleo，中国侧 Moka、北森、大易、e成）、猎头 CRM 与交付系统（Bullhorn、Vincere、Loxo、Clockwork、Recruit CRM）、寻访与触达（LinkedIn Recruiter、SeekOut、hireEZ、Amazing Hiring、GitHub 与学术检索，中国侧 BOSS 直聘、猎聘、脉脉、拉勾、牛客）、评估与测评（HackerRank、CodeSignal、CoderPad、结构化面试题库与 scorecard 评分卡、Hogan、SHL、Predictive Index、Criteria、案例作业与工作样本）、面试调度与视频（GoodTime、Calendly、HireVue、Spark Hire）、背景调查与合规（HireRight、Checkr、Sterling，中国侧 i背调、八方锦程，以及个人信息保护法与 GDPR 下的授权链、FCRA 的不利行动通知）、数据与漏斗分析（time to fill 与 time to hire 的口径差异、offer 接受率、通过率与转化漏斗、quality of hire 的度量困境、招聘成本 cost per hire 的口径战争）、以及最被低估的纸笔工具（intake 提纲、成功标准清单、scorecard、人才地图表格、Boolean 检索式、一页纸的岗位价值主张）—— 选型的真正分岔从来不是功能清单，而是『你的岗位是靠触达赢还是靠转化赢』。(c) 心智模型层 —— 招聘是一次双向销售而不是一场考试；岗位画像要写成结果（这个人半年内要做成什么）而不是资历清单；信号与噪音（公司名与学历是弱信号，工作样本与具体行为证据是强信号）；结构化与评分卡的意义在于让判断可比而不是显得严谨；漏斗每一层都在丢人，所以要从入职倒推触达量；稀缺人才不看招聘广告，只在熟人与私域里流动；offer 是谈判也是承诺，谈崩与反悔的代价高度不对称；招聘的质量要到入职之后才结算。(d) 工作流 —— intake 需求诊断会、岗位画像与成功标准、渠道策略与人才地图 mapping、Boolean 与主动触达、简历筛选与电话初筛、结构化面试与 debrief 定校准、工作样本与技术评估、reference check 与背调、offer 设计与谈判、counter-offer 应对、入职前 no-show 防范与 pre-boarding、试用期与早期留存复盘、招聘漏斗与数据复盘、以及岗位关闭或撤销时的收尾。(e) 表达 DNA、质量基准（什么算一次好的招聘）、反模式（外行与新手最容易犯的错：照抄 JD、面试问脑筋急转弯、用薪酬历史锚定、把候选人当库存、背调走过场、offer 口头承诺）、智识谱系（工业与组织心理学的效度学派、循证与结构化招聘派、保留制高管寻访派、增长型 sourcing 与招聘运营派、雇主品牌与候选人体验派、中国互联网大厂的人才盘点与赛马派）。) Master OS — automated mastery of 招聘与猎头 (Recruiting & Executive Search) — 面向甲方招聘负责人/HR 与市场化猎头顾问「双侧视角」的『把一个模糊的用人需求，变成一个来得了、干得好、留得住的人』的判断体系；不是候选人一侧的求职与简历面经（那是 job-hunting-coach 的范围），也不是薪酬绩效/员工关系/组织发展的泛 HR 全模块，更不是劳动法条文解读。覆盖：(a) 第一性张力 —— 这行的核心世界观分歧：**需求诊断优先 ⇄ 快速供给优先**（用人经理提来的岗位需求几乎总是一张愿望清单，资深招聘先开 intake 会把『必须有』与『最好有』拆开、把画像逼成可证伪的成功标准；但按成单计酬的猎头把诊断时间压不进单价里，于是行业里同时存在『先诊断再搜寻』和『先扔简历再说』两种作业习惯）；**结构化面试 ⇄ 看人的直觉**（工业与组织心理学近一个世纪的效度元分析一致指向：结构化面试、工作样本、认知能力测验的预测效度明显高于非结构化面谈与经验年限，但一线用人经理绝大多数仍相信自己聊两句就能看准人——这是本行最大的知行落差，也是所有循证招聘流派的出发点；顺带一提，业内长期奉为圭臬的 Schmidt-Hunter 效度排序近年被重新校正，工作样本的效度被下调，这场修正本身就是本行必须如实呈现的争议）；**能力素质 ⇄ 文化匹配**（culture fit 既是最常被写在拒信里的理由，也是被批评得最凶的偏见外壳，Google 一派主张改口叫 culture add，看的是这个人补上了团队缺的东西，而不是像不像我们）；**主动寻访 sourcing ⇄ 被动投递漏斗**（高端与稀缺技能岗只有 outbound 人才地图一条路；量大岗位靠渠道效率、转化率与自动化，两条路的技能树几乎不重叠）；**人才地图是资产 ⇄ 人才地图是浪费**（保留制猎头把 mapping 当交付物的一部分，成功付费猎头认为地图做完单子已经黄了）；**保留制 retained ⇄ 成功付费 contingency**（按阶段预付、独家、深度地图 vs 多家赛马、入职才收钱、速度压倒深度；两种商业模式塑造出两种截然不同的作业节奏、候选人对待方式与职业道德边界，比如 off-limits 不挖回自己安置过的人）；**内部招聘团队 ⇄ 外部猎头与 RPO**（成本、速度、知识沉淀、雇主品牌归属谁的长期争论；embedded recruiter 是近年的折中）；**候选人体验 ⇄ 筛选效率**（漏斗越严体验越差，被拒者也是客户与口碑）；**AI 筛选的效率 ⇄ 合规与偏见**（简历解析、AI 面试评分、自动排序已在大规模使用，同时被监管盯上：纽约市 Local Law 144 要求自动化决策工具做偏见审计并公示、欧盟 AI 法案把招聘划为高风险场景、伊利诺伊州对 AI 视频面试单独立法；业内既离不开它，也在诉讼与审计里学做记录）；**offer 谈判的锚定 ⇄ 薪酬透明**（多地
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。
Exhaustive problem space exploration using the MIT Synthetic Neurobiology "tiling tree" method. Partitions a problem into MECE (Mutually Exclusive, Collectively Exhaustive) subsets recursively via parallel subagents, then evaluates leaf ideas against specified criteria. Use when users say "tiling tree", "tile the solution space", "exhaustively explore approaches to", "what are all the ways to", or request a MECE breakdown of a problem. Requires orchestrating-chat-agents 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。
The Socratic spec-refinement front of /feature, and the planning front of /sprint. Routed to BEFORE any code — it turns a one-line idea into a concrete spec with testable criteria, ready for initial combined sprint review or explicit sequential approval. Five gated phases — frame, shape, refine, write, review-and-approve. No implementation before an approved spec; the caller retains required planning, execution and delivery ordering. Each acceptance criterion becomes one tdd Phase 1 obligation.
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。