「eval」の検索結果

Comprehensive technology stack evaluation and comparison tool with TCO analysis, security assessment, and intelligent recommendations for engineering teams

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 a batch of content in one run: ranked quality report, systemic issues. "score our whole content library"

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。

Tune eval thresholds: dimension minimums, weights, auto-reject floors. "raise the hallucination threshold"

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 has a judge/grader and human-labeled data, and wants to measure how well the judge agrees with humans, detect systematic biases, determine whether automatic evaluation can replace human review, or build a human-reduction roadmap. Also use when the user mentions calibration, TPR/TNR, judge validation, inter-rater agreement, Cohen's kappa, bias detection, or "is my automatic evaluation trustworthy." Merges the calibrate and align functions into one 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。

Use when the user wants to test their LLM/agent application for safety and security vulnerabilities — jailbreaks, prompt injection, PII extraction, harmful content generation, or evaluator gaming. Also use when the user mentions security testing, adversarial testing, red teaming, safety evaluation, ASR (Attack Success Rate), or "is my app safe to deploy." Outputs ASR paired with over-refusal rate and an audit document.

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。

Pick the right LLM for LEGAL TRANSLATION — translating contracts, statutes, case law, and legal correspondence across languages, including Arabic/MENA. Vendor-neutral routing triangulated from mid-2026 evidence (WMT25 human eval, SwiLTra-Bench legal-MT, multilingual-reasoning proxies, ArabLegalEval). There is NO clean legal-translation leaderboard, so this vertical is directional and treats human legal-linguist review as mandatory. Asks up to 4 quick questions (language pair, cost, speed, privacy/certification), then recommends a primary model + fallback + what to avoid + what a human must verify. Use when someone asks "which model to translate this contract/statute", "best AI for legal translation", "translate this legal doc to/from Arabic", or is about to machine-translate legal text without a fixed model.

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。

Risk-based vendor assessment framework for IT service providers, technology vendors, and third-party partners under DORA, NIS2, GDPR. Provides three-phase process (Initial Screening / Detailed Assessment / Final Evaluation), six-dimension risk scoring (Financial/Operational/Compliance/Security/Reputational/Strategic) with weighted matrices, full DORA Art. 28-30 contractual checklist, NIS2 Art. 21(2) security measures enumeration, GDPR Art. 28 documentation checks, red flags per dimension, trigger-based review criteria, and document templates. Use when: (1) Evaluating new vendors or technology providers, (2) Conducting critical ICT third-party due diligence under DORA, (3) Performing supply chain security assessment under NIS2, (4) Creating vendor onboarding documentation, (5) Establishing ongoing vendor monitoring, (6) Assessing concentration risk, or (7) Generating executive vendor risk reports.

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。

Routes any legal task to the right LLM, like OpenRouter but for legal work and grounded in benchmarks instead of brand loyalty. Built from mid-2026 legal evals (legalbenchmarks.ai, Vals AI × Stanford LegalBench across 124 models, Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark, the Atticus Project's CUAD/MAUD/ACORD) plus translation evidence (WMT25, SwiLTra-Bench, ArabLegalEval). Covers five verticals: contract drafting, info extraction, legal research, contract review, and legal translation (including Arabic/MENA). Each asks up to four questions (cost, speed, accuracy/stakes, privacy/jurisdiction/language), then returns a primary model, a fallback, what to avoid, and what a human must verify. Core principle: capability is not controllability, so every route ends with a verification step. Not legal advice; a lawyer owns 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。

Assess compliance with the EU General-Purpose AI (GPAI) Code of Practice under the AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689). Use when asked to determine GPAI model provider obligations, assess Code of Practice compliance, evaluate transparency or copyright requirements for GPAI models, check systemic risk obligations, build a GPAI compliance roadmap, or prepare for AI Office requests. Covers all three Code chapters (Transparency, Copyright, Safety & Security), the 12 commitments and their measures, systemic risk classification (Article 51), provider obligations (Articles 53 and 55), open-source exemptions, enforcement timeline, Commission/AI Office supervision, and DACH-specific overlays such as BSI cybersecurity and works council implications. Triggers on phrases like "GPAI compliance", "Code of Practice assessment", "GPAI model obligations", "systemic risk evaluation", "AI Act transparency requirements", "GPAI copyright policy", "general-purpose AI compliance".

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 a teacher-drafted central historical question for its capacity to drive genuine historical inquiry. Use when assessing whether a question will generate real evidence-weighing or produce shallow responses.

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。

Design a critical thinking task targeting specific skills like evaluating evidence, identifying bias, or analysing arguments. Use when embedding critical analysis into subject lessons.

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。

Design a lesson opening that activates prior knowledge and connects previous learning to today's content. Use when planning lesson starters, retrieval openers, or advance organisers.

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。

Negotiate a pre-code contract between generator and evaluator personas that defines what "done" means before any code is written. Turns fuzzy specs into a testable target the evaluator can hold the generator to.

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。

Build a repeatable eval loop that grades agent output with an LLM judge, so prompt/skill changes get scored against a baseline instead of eyeballed. Reuses loopkit's verifier subagent as the grader — do not build a new one.

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。

Full brand naming workflow for founders, agencies, and businesses. Use this skill whenever the user says "help me name this brand", "brand naming", "I need a name for", "name ideas for", "what should I call my brand/company/product", "naming a startup", "brand name suggestions", "help with naming", or shares a brand brief and asks for name options. Also triggers when the user shares existing name options and asks for feedback, evaluation, ranking, or scoring of those names. Auto-detects whether to run the full generation workflow or the evaluation workflow based on what the user provides. Always use this skill for any brand or product naming task — even if the user just casually mentions needing a name.

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。

胥克谦式AI-Native产品开发方法论。适用于：(1) 使用AI Agent（Claude Code、Codex、Cursor等）进行产品级软件开发，(2) 设计和优化Harness/Skill体系，(3) 文档驱动开发(SDD)流程，(4) 构建自动化质量门禁和eval机制，(5) Token成本优化与缓存策略，(6) 产品人转型开发者的AI编程实践。触发场景包括"帮我设计开发流程"、"怎么降低token成本"、"怎么提高AI编码质量"、"文档驱动"、"质量门禁"、"harness设计"、"单agent vs multi-agent"、"自动化迭代"、"AI产品开发"、"SDD"、"eval机制"等。即使用户只是说"帮我用AI写代码"或"怎么让agent干活更靠谱"也应触发。注意：如果产品是行为开放、用户输入不可穷举的AI-native类型，请改用 xuefeng-method skill。不用于：单个bug修复或小改动（无需方法论）、PRD需求文档写作（用product-manager）。

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。

Research and evaluate affiliate programs to find the best ones to promote. Use this skill when the user asks anything about finding affiliate programs, comparing commission rates, evaluating affiliate opportunities, searching for products to promote, picking a niche, or mentions openaffiliate.dev. Also trigger for: "which SaaS should I promote", "best affiliate programs for X", "high commission programs", "recurring commission affiliate", "compare these affiliate programs", "is X affiliate program worth it", "find me something to promote", "what pays the most", "affiliate programs with long cookie duration".

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。

Score product remarkability 1-10 to decide if it's worth promoting. Seth Godin's Purple Cow test. Triggers on: "is this product worth promoting", "should I promote", "product audit", "purple cow", "remarkable product", "is it remarkable", "rate this product", "product quality check", "worth my reputation", "product evaluation", "would I recommend without commission", "product remarkability score", "evaluate this affiliate product", "quality gate for promotion".

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。

Reverse-engineer raw materials (Sparse idea, Dense idea, experimental log) from an existing AI research paper to build a benchmark case for evaluating paper-writing pipelines. Replicates the PaperWritingBench dataset construction procedure from arXiv:2604.05018 §3 / App. C. TRIGGER when the user asks to "build a benchmark case from this paper", "reverse-engineer raw materials", or "evaluate my pipeline against PaperWritingBench".

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 when scientists need help with research problem selection, project ideation, troubleshooting stuck projects, or strategic scientific decisions. Use this skill when users ask to pitch a new research idea, work through a project problem, evaluate project risks, plan research strategy, navigate decision trees, or get help choosing what scientific problem to work on. Typical requests include "I have an idea for a project", "I'm stuck on my research", "help me evaluate this project", "what should I work on", or "I need strategic advice about my 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。

Design taste evaluation framework — DVF primary filter, Apple/Google/Jobs design principles as explicit scoring criteria, weighted decision matrix, and option ranking for the DIVERGE wave

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。

Evaluates new product opportunities through demand, channels and economics before committing to build.

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。

Evaluates observed product outcomes against a prior hypothesis; does not run experiments or change user treatment.

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 Fetch API, Caching, and Revalidation strategies in Next.js. Use when fetching data, configuring cache behavior, or implementing revalidation in Next.js.

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。