700 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Extract clean markdown from any URL, including JavaScript-rendered SPAs. Use this skill whenever the user provides a URL and wants its content, says "scrape", "grab", "fetch", "pull", "get the page", "extract from this URL", or "read this webpage". Handles JS-rendered pages, multiple concurrent URLs, and returns LLM-optimized markdown. Use this instead of WebFetch for any webpage content extraction.
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。
Web search with full page content extraction. Use this skill whenever the user asks to search the web, find articles, research a topic, look something up, find recent news, discover sources, or says "search for", "find me", "look up", "what are people saying about", or "find articles about". Returns real search results with optional full-page markdown — not just snippets. Provides capabilities beyond Grok's built-in WebSearch.
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。
Debug and troubleshoot WorkOS AuthKit authentication issues with Convex. Use when authentication fails, JWT validation errors occur, user identity returns null, email claims are missing, admin access checks fail, or sign in button does not work. Supports Netlify deployment.
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。
Guide for when to use and when not to use return validators in Convex functions. Use this skill whenever the user is writing Convex queries, mutations, or actions and needs guidance on return value validation. Also trigger when the user asks about Convex type safety, runtime validation, AI-generated Convex code, Convex AI rules, Convex security best practices, or when they're debugging return type issues in Convex functions. Trigger this skill when users mention "validators", "returns", "return type", or "exact types" in the context of Convex development. Also trigger when writing or reviewing Convex AI rules or prompts that instruct LLMs how to write Convex code.
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。
Debug and troubleshoot WorkOS AuthKit authentication issues with Convex. Use when authentication fails, JWT validation errors occur, user identity returns null, email claims are missing, admin access checks fail, or sign in button does not work. Supports Netlify deployment.
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。
Guide for when to use and when not to use return validators in Convex functions. Use this skill whenever the user is writing Convex queries, mutations, or actions and needs guidance on return value validation. Also trigger when the user asks about Convex type safety, runtime validation, AI-generated Convex code, Convex AI rules, Convex security best practices, or when they're debugging return type issues in Convex functions. Trigger this skill when users mention "validators", "returns", "return type", or "exact types" in the context of Convex development. Also trigger when writing or reviewing Convex AI rules or prompts that instruct LLMs how to write Convex code.
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 websites for SEO, performance, security, technical, content, and 15 other issue cateories with 230+ rules using the squirrelscan CLI. Returns LLM-optimized reports with health scores, broken links, meta tag analysis, and actionable recommendations. Use to discover and asses website o...
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 websites for SEO, performance, security, technical, content, and 15 other issue cateories with 230+ rules using the squirrelscan CLI. Returns LLM-optimized reports with health scores, broken links, meta tag analysis, and actionable recommendations. Use to discover and asses website or webapp issues and health.
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 a codebase as a read-only senior advisor, prioritize evidence-backed improvements, and write self-contained implementation plans. Use for codebase audits, improvement roadmaps, focused planning, plan review, plan reconciliation, or executing an existing improve plan through an isolated Codex worktree. The advisor never edits source code; execution uses codex-improve and returns to the main agent for 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。
Audit a dataset or access rule before it joins an identity-graph build (access rules behave like datasets in NQL here). Enumerates failure modes (hub identifiers, high-degree nodes, suspicious values, over-connected identifiers), tests hypotheses in parallel, quantifies damage by rows / edges / entities, and proposes minimal filters ranked by severity. When issues are found, returns a validated `CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW` NQL the caller can run to produce a graph-ready clean source; if the data passes, says so and recommends it unchanged. Plans and authors the clean-view NQL; does not execute it. Use when: "audit this dataset before the graph build", "find bad edges in <source>", "check identity data quality", "recommend filters for the graph build", "quantify damage from <identifier_type>", "pre-graph DQ". (narrative-identity)
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。
Find the canonical Rosetta Stone attribute that best matches a fuzzy description, semantic phrase, or required schema shape. Searches the catalog with pagination, describes the shortlist in one batched call, ranks candidates by name + shape match, and returns the canonical attribute ID plus close alternatives. Use when: "find the X attribute", "what's the graph-edge attribute ID", "look up the email Rosetta Stone attribute", "search the attribute catalog for Y", "which attribute has SOURCE_ID + TARGET_ID + IS_DIRECTED". (narrative-common)
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。
Lateral-thinking playbook that always returns a five-tier strategy portfolio (Quick Win through Moonshot). Use when you need options, alternatives, or trade-offs; when progress is stalled or failing repeatedly; or when you ask to think creatively, reframe constraints, and choose a strategic path before execution.
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。
Location, restaurant and hotel search via OpenStreetMap (Nominatim + Overpass API). Returns POIs (Points of Interest) near a location or searches by free text.
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。
Prepares a discovery call brief from what the user has on a prospect (CRM record, inbound form, emails, notes, public material the user supplies): what is known with sources, gaps against the qualification dimensions, hypotheses to test, questions in priority order and what to listen for. Returns a DRAFT Markdown brief in the chat. Use when the user asks to "prep me for the discovery call with <prospect>", "what should I ask on this first call", "intro call brief", "questions for the qualification call" or "what do we know before we speak to them". Do not use for scoring leads against a rubric, use lead-qualification-scorer instead; for an existing customer's account review use account-plan-builder. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Reviews the text and structure of a document, slide deck or web page against the accessibility rules the user supplies, or a default set covering heading structure, image alternative text, colour used as the only cue, link text, reading order, tables and language, and returns numbered findings with location, rule, severity and a ready-to-apply fix for the author, plus proposed alt text and a list of checks that need a tool or a person. Use when the user asks to "check this document for accessibility", "review the alt text in this deck", "is this page accessible", "run an accessibility check on these slides", "find accessibility issues before I publish" or "check my headings and link text". Do not use for brand or template compliance of slides, use branded-deck-builder instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Prepares the trend update for a recurring emailed report: identifies report emails not yet processed, extracts the configured metrics from their spreadsheet, CSV or PDF attachments, returns new rows for an append-only trends sheet and writes a DRAFT summary with period-on-period deltas and flagged anomalies. Use when the user asks to "update the trends for the weekly report", "analyse the latest monthly report", "what changed in the latest report", "do the latest numbers look unusual" or "set up tracking for a report that arrives by email". Do not use for a single file with no trend state, use dataset-insight-pack instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Maintains four living project files (overview and progress log, decision log, RAID log, links) from the mail, channel posts, documents and meeting notes the user attaches or the agent can reach, returns each touched file complete in the chat for the user to save, and builds a weekly DRAFT status report from those files. Use when the user asks to "set up tracking for project X", "catch the project files up", "log this decision against the project", "add this risk to the RAID log", "save this link to the project" or "write this week's status report". Do not use for reviewing an existing RAID log for stale or ownerless entries, use raid-log-review instead; for an HTML status page, use project-dashboard-builder; for minutes of one meeting, use meeting-minutes-writer. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Sweeps a named list of news sources and blogs for items relevant to the user's role and returns a dated digest of 5 to 8 items, each with a one-line so-what, a source URL and a publication date, as a Markdown document or a ready-to-paste email. Use when the user asks to "run my news digest", "do my news sweep", "draft my morning news flash", "what happened in industry news this week" or to monitor vendor or industry news for their role. Do not use for the user's own inbox, calendar and mentions brief, use custom-daily-brief instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Reviews a RAID log (risks, assumptions, issues, dependencies) line by line and returns a DRAFT review pack: which entries are stale, overdue, duplicated, ownerless, incomplete or misfiled, why, and a proposed update per line as current text against proposed text with the decision the project manager must take. Never re-rates, closes, merges or edits the log. Use when the user asks to "review the RAID log", "clean up the risk log", "health-check the RAID log before the steering meeting", "which risks are stale", "find duplicate risks" or "refresh the issue log". Do not use for setting up a new RAID log or logging a single new risk, issue or decision, use project-status-tracker instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Reads one export transaction, order or shipment description and returns a DRAFT export review pack: parties to screen with a screening checklist, an item classification worksheet, a red-flag review, licence-determination questions and open items. Use when the user asks to "prepare the export review for this order", "pre-check this shipment for export control", "who do we need to screen on this deal", "build the classification worksheet for this item" or "assemble the trade-compliance file for this technology transfer". Do not use for vendor security or due-diligence screening of a supplier's questionnaire answers; use vendor-risk-screening-brief instead. Never classifies, screens, clears, decides licence need or releases a shipment; trade compliance does. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Reviews one deal's notes and timeline (CRM opportunity record, activity log, emails, meeting notes, forecast entries) for risk signals such as a single contact thread, no identified budget owner, slipped or missing dates, silence after a proposal, an undefined decision process or a competitor named late, and returns a DRAFT risk register: each signal with the quoted evidence and its date, a severity on a stated scale, and one proposed next action with an owner role for the user to decide on. Use when the user asks to "review the risks on this deal", "why is this opportunity stalling", "is this deal single-threaded", "deal health check before the forecast call" or "what should we do next on <opportunity>". Do not use for a whole-account plan, use account-plan-builder instead; for scoring early leads against a rubric use lead-qualification-scorer. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Compares one policy against one requirement set (standard, regulation, contract schedule or customer requirement) clause by clause and returns a draft gap review: each requirement element, the policy clause that appears to address it, an apparent match state, and every gap as a question with the clause reference on both sides. Never concludes that the policy complies; the owner decides. Use when the user asks to "gap our policy against the standard", "map this policy to the regulation clause by clause", "check the security policy against the customer's contract schedule", "compare our policy with the new edition" or "where does our policy fall short of the requirements". Do not use for mapping a requirement to the operating controls that implement it, use controls-gap-pack instead; for what a regulatory change means for the organisation, use regulatory-change-impact-note. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Reads a risk register together with meeting notes and incident reports and returns a draft update pack: existing risks whose exposure, controls, ownership or status the sources say have changed, new risk candidates, closure candidates, and the one owner decision each item needs. Never assigns or changes a likelihood, impact, score or colour and never edits the register; owners decide. Use when the user asks to "update the risk register from these minutes", "refresh the register with the incidents since the last review", "reconcile the register against the notes" or "what changed on our risks". Do not use for writing up an incident itself, use incident-postmortem-drafter or data-incident-impact-brief instead; to track actions from minutes, use corrective-action-tracker. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。
Reviews one employee software request (tool, purpose, users, data handled, cost, urgency) against the approved-tools list and the policies the user provides and returns a draft review for the reviewer: match state on the list with the row quoted, approved tools the list itself describes as covering the same need, policy clauses that bear on the request with quoted text, questions for the requester and the reviewer, and one suggested decision with its basis. Never approves, procures, installs or adds a tool to the list. Use when the user asks to "review this software request", "is this tool on the approved list", "check this request against our software policy", "do we already have something approved that does this" or "prepare the decision note for this tool request". Do not use for a full vendor security assessment, use vendor-risk-screening-brief instead; for sorting mixed requests, use request-intake-triage. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。