「aims」の検索結果

Analyze credential-free public website monitoring evidence from server access logs, HTTP fetches, robots/llms/sitemap checks, and exported summaries while protecting raw IP and private query data. Use this skill when the user asks whether crawlers or AI bots reached a site, whether public SEO/LLM discovery files respond, or how to separate observed facts from unknown Search Console, rank, analytics, or citation 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。

Use when a command, adapter, or runtime smoke depends on proving an agent runtime's capabilities before trusting command routing, writes, shell access, or validation 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。

Diagnoses and fixes Claude behavioral issues in system prompts and Projects using tested countermeasure templates. Use when "Claude is too verbose," "keeps hedging," "agrees with everything," "claims it did something it didn't," "won't use a tool," "fix Claude's output," "tune Claude's behavior," "Claude ignores my preferences," "adds unsolicited disclaimers," "uses too many lists." Covers ten tendencies: agreeableness (output-content + persistent-preference), hedging, verbosity, list overuse, fabricated precision, over-exploration, tool miscalibration (over- and under-triggering), LaTeX defaulting, editorial drift, self-referential fabrication. Also use when auditing a system prompt for behavioral calibration or recalibrating a pre-4.7 prompt, and when users describe recurring output problems without naming a tendency. Do NOT use for scoring a prompt's overall quality — use rootnode-prompt-validation if available.

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 RuField tests, trust boundaries, privacy projections, and evidence promotion. Use for conformance review, security regression review, release validation, or checking whether field accuracy claims have support.

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。

Implement and execute approved research Experiment, Tuning, or Design Cards with reproducible logs, metrics, environment, and artifacts. Use for bounded coding, debugging, and runs; not for changing claims, priorities, budgets, or the Research Spine.

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。

Select an OCR/HTR engine by benchmarking candidates on the same labelled samples — source ground truth from open datasets (e.g. Hugging Face PAGE-XML corpora) or hand-transcription, wrap every engine behind a transcribe(image_path) -> str adapter (vision-LLMs via any OpenAI-compatible endpoint, dedicated HTR REST APIs, cloud OCR), and score with zero-dependency raw CER, lenient CER, WER, and a critical name/date token diff. Use when choosing an engine for handwriting or historical-document transcription, when published accuracy claims need honest verification on your own material, or when a records workflow must surface confident-but-wrong names and dates that a low aggregate CER hides.

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 thumbnail concepts need real-size, accuracy-first scoring without misleading claims. Not for generating thumbnails or declaring winners that fail the accuracy rubric.

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 one already selected Proto UI work-item claim as a reversible GitHub metadata mutation. Use after pui-select produced a current proposal and the exact claim has authorization, live permission, current readiness, and an idempotent write boundary. Do not select work, decide readiness, release claims, or widen the authorized wording.

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。

根據使用者的文章或論文草稿，自動用 Semantic Scholar、Crossref、arXiv API 搜尋相關文獻，並查核既有引用(文獻是否真實存在、書目欄位是否正確、內容是否支持文中論點)，也能從主題出發寫出「每個宣稱都有真實文獻支撐」的帶引用文章；另含研究生工具組：文獻矩陣、領域地圖、research gap 偵測、閱讀筆記卡、引用完整性檢查、中英術語一致性、口試/審稿預演、新文獻追蹤、引用需求標記(annotate)、反面證據搜尋(counter)、證據強度評級(strength)、claim-evidence 總表(claims)、撤稿查詢(retract)。凡是使用者提到找文獻、找 paper、補參考文獻、查核引用、檢查 citation、驗證參考文獻、related work、literature review，貼文章要求配文獻、問「這段話有沒有文獻支持」、要求「寫一篇帶參考文獻的文章」、要整理文獻比較表、問已指名兩概念的交集有沒有人做過、要準備口試文獻答辯時，都要使用本 skill。本 skill 的 gap 指令只查證使用者已指名的 X 與 Y 交集；若使用者連題目都還沒有、需要生成並逐一淘汰候選方向，那是題目生成，不在本 skill 範圍(環境裝有 research-gap-hunter 時交給它，沒有就如實說明本 skill 只能查證已指名的交集)。本 skill 的 map 指令盤的是**文獻**——奠基文獻是哪幾篇、關鍵作者是誰、近三年往哪走；若使用者要的是「這個領域現在有哪些**做法**、每一種買到什麼付出什麼、哪些已經飽和」，那是技術盤點不是文獻盤點，交給 research-gap-hunter 的 landscape，沒有那個 skill 就如實說明本 skill 的 map 只回答文獻層的問題。

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。

Provision a zero-config, no-signup, temporary Upstash Redis database for an AI agent with a single POST to https://upstash.com/start-redis, with no account, API key, or SDK setup required. Use when an agent needs scratch Redis right now and the user has not provided credentials, for short-term memory across tool calls, conversation history, a sub-agent work queue, ranked recall, or a quick prototype or demo. Covers idempotent creation and re-fetching credentials, calling the database through the body-style REST API or the official SDKs, and telling the user how to claim it. The database lives 3 days unless the user claims it; not for production data, PII, or secrets.

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。

Gathers information from multiple sources in parallel, compares what they say, flags where they agree or conflict, and delivers a clean synthesis with a confidence rating for each finding. Useful for making evidence-backed decisions, when evaluating competing claims, during due diligence on a vendor or market, and for building research briefs before strategy sessions. Use when the user says "research this", "synthesize multiple sources", "compare sources", "research report", "what does the evidence say", "gather information on", or "deep dive into".

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 evidence needs grading before anyone reasons from it — the user asks "how reliable is this?", "grade this source", "check this report", "can I trust this article?", "is this corroborated?", or hands over a URL, a pasted report or a Liberty91 event ahead of an ACH or assessment. The Quality of Information Check from the CIA Tradecraft Primer, adapted for vendor and press CTI reporting. Resolves each document to its originating source, splits it into claims, and grades every claim on two written elements, access level (how the source knows) and claim support (what backs the statement), with a stated rationale, using a fixed rubric with hard caps. The grade is not an Admiralty rating. Five outlets citing one vendor report count as one source; anything that cannot be traced to a primary is capped, not guessed. Returns a graded claim table, gaps, a deception screen and JSON. /ach, /threat-assessment and /writing-assessments run it first by default.

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 as the default entry point for any CTI request that doesn't name a specific skill. Activates when a user asks to investigate an indicator, profile a threat actor, write an assessment, enrich IOCs, or build detection rules, and when a user asks where a report or article comes from, how reliable it is, to grade a source, check a report, or split a report into claims, or pastes a bare article URL. Routes to the right investigation, provenance, grading or analysis skill, then auto-applies rigor skills (source rating, TLP, confidence, likelihood) on the 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。

Use when you need to check whether an organisation/domain has been claimed by a ransomware group, profile a specific ransomware group (TTPs, leak-site infra, IOCs, YARA), or aggregate ransomware victim claims by country/sector/timeframe. Backed by ransomware.live's leak-site scrapes — 27k+ victims across 330+ groups. Commonly invoked by /domain-investigation, /ransomware-ecosystem, /threat-actor-profiling, and detection-engineering workflows. Reads $RANSOMWARE_LIVE.

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 about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always

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 about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always

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。

Monitors dark web forums, marketplaces, paste sites, and ransomware leak sites for mentions of organizational assets, leaked credentials, threatened attacks, and threat actor communications to provide early warning intelligence. Use when establishing dark web monitoring coverage, investigating specific data breach claims, or enriching incident investigations with dark web context. Activates for requests involving dark web OSINT, leak site monitoring, credential exposure, Recorded Future dark web, or Tor hidden service intelligence.

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, recover, and prepare portable handoffs of existing private PFC2D/PFC3D 5.0 asphalt cases, including integrity manifests, path portability, saved-state claims, cheap restore-first validation, and legacy-state quarantine.

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 content against your brand voice, style guide, and messaging pillars, flagging deviations by severity with specific before/after fixes. Use when checking a draft before it ships, when auditing copy for voice consistency and terminology, or when screening for unsubstantiated claims, missing disclaimers, and other legal flags.

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 exploring, continuing, or accepting a deep-learning or computer-science research idea. Converts claims into pilot-first experiment matrices covering diagnostics, failure analysis, authorized execution, evaluation, and paper-story viability.

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 research writing, reviews, rebuttals, or related-work planning needs academic evidence. Searches literature, screens candidate papers, audits novelty and missing work, verifies DOI/BibTeX/reference metadata and citation authenticity, and checks whether sources support the stated 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。

Verify code or product claims after changes using fresh, risk-matched evidence. Use before saying a bug is fixed, tests pass, requirements are met, or a branch is ready.

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。

Deep OAuth 2.0 / OpenID Connect security assessment. Covers the full attack surface: redirect_uri validation bypass (path traversal, open redirect chains, subdomain confusion, URL parsing tricks, parameter pollution, response mode switching), missing/broken state parameter CSRF, PKCE downgrade and absent-challenge attacks, implicit grant token leakage (Referer, browser history, XSS fragment theft), authorization code injection, scope escalation, client confusion attacks, mutable-claims account takeover (iss+sub confusion, email-keyed identity merging), pre-account takeover via unverified registration, OpenID Connect dynamic client registration SSRF (logo_uri, jwks_uri, sector_identifier_uri, request_uri), nonce replay, ID token validation failures, Device Code phishing flow, mobile custom URI scheme hijacking, refresh token persistence, token introspection enumeration, consent screen clickjacking, host header injection, and cross-IdP mix-up attacks. Uses KOAuth, jwt_tool, nuclei oauth templates, and manual http(action="request", ...) payloads. Every technique includes actual request payloads and verification logic. Chains from /pentester or /api-security when OAuth endpoints are discovered. Chains into /web-exploit for open redirect, XSS, and SSRF chaining. Chains into /post-exploit when full account takeover is achieved. Chains into /credential-audit when access tokens or refresh tokens are recovered.

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。

Frappe HRMS and ERPNext HR guidance for employees, attendance, leave, payroll, shifts, expense claims, recruitment, onboarding, and HR workflows. Use when work touches HRMS or people operations in the Frappe ecosystem.

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。