「ct」の検索結果

Use when a Spark implementation needs an evidence-based review for correctness, ownership, compatibility, failure handling, maintainability, and unnecessary complexity.

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 paired tr.md and en.md files need a parity verdict, when titles, frontmatter, headings, or DOI sets may have drifted between languages, or when a bilingual document is approaching release and its translation coverage needs an 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。

Use when authorship order, CRediT contribution roles, or AI-assistance attribution must be recorded transparently for a manuscript, when an author dispute needs an evidence trail, or before a contributorship statement is required at submission; this skill maintains the human-attribution ledger of who contributed what and in which role (authorship order, CRediT taxonomy, revision responsibilities), which is distinct from the disclosure-metadata audit owned by ai-disclosure-auditor.

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 systematic, scoping, or rapid review needs a reproducible pipeline: protocol framing (PICO/SPIDER/PCC), a logged search string, title/abstract and full-text screening with recorded exclusion reasons, and PRISMA flow counts, with the human as the deciding screener.

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 adapting academic findings for a public audience (op-ed, social post, podcast) and the simplification must stay evidence-faithful, avoid overclaiming, respect embargoes, and disclose AI assistance.

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 Claude Code session loops, drifts from scope, claims a fix that CI rejects, hits context, PATH, or permission walls, or fails in a way another retry will not solve and a root cause diagnosis is needed instead.

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 before a tag, GitHub release, or Zenodo archive, when README, CATALOG, CHANGELOG, CITATION.cff, the disclosure aggregate, and skill discovery must agree, or when a go or no-go release verdict needs recorded evidence behind it.

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 authoring a new manuscript, thesis chapter, or abstract from scratch in Turkish and English in parallel — building the claim skeleton first, then drafting Turkish and re-authoring English — not for auditing parity between existing versions.

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 automating research session rituals in Claude Code with hooks, such as session-start context injection, daily research logging, session-end persistence, or pre-commit guards that block secrets and unverified citations.

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 study's materials, data, code, or preprint need an open-science release: license choice, a persistent DOI (Zenodo/OSF), README and metadata, and an access-and-embargo decision that respects ethics constraints.

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 researcher asks where to start, which project skill fits the current stage of a study, or in what order literature scoping, source access, vault upkeep, drafting, citation verification, disclosure, and review response should run.

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 reference list needs APA 7 cleanup, when DOIs must be confirmed real against Crossref or PubMed, when the user asks whether AI-suggested citations actually exist, or when a manuscript needs a citation hygiene pass before submission or defense.

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 choosing a journal for a finished or nearly finished manuscript, when index status in Scopus, SSCI, ESCI, or TR Dizin must be confirmed, when a venue looks predatory, or when a cover letter needs drafting from the manuscript's actual 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 an ethics committee or IRB application involves AI anywhere in the pipeline, when KVKK, GDPR, or EU AI Act duties must be mapped to a study, or when consent and disclosure language about AI use needs drafting before submission.

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 reviewer comments arrive and each one needs a tracked decision, when a revise and resubmit letter must map every comment to a manuscript change, or when contradictory reviewer demands need evidence-based, editor-facing framing.

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 AI contribution metadata must match the actual workflow, when model alias and dated identifiers need auditing, when verified and fabricated citation counts feed a release decision, or when a venue's AI disclosure statement needs evidence behind it.

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 clean, minimal technical SVG diagrams in a consistent Cloudflare-inspired style. Use when creating architecture diagrams, flow diagrams, or component diagrams for blog posts and documentation.

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 the user asks to "plan a feature", "create PRD", "interview me about requirements", "define stories", "write a spec", "break down feature into tasks", "create implementation plan", "help me scope this feature", "what questions should I answer", or discusses feature planning. Covers the PRD interview process, spec structure, story atomization, and 4-phase workflow from idea to Dex tasks.

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。

Zigbee, Thread, and Matter mesh-protocol attack methodology — IEEE 802.15.4 sniffing with TI CC2531 / CC2540 / Sonoff Zigbee Dongle E, KillerBee toolkit, Touchlink commissioning abuse with the well-known transport key, replay/injection attacks, Zigbee Cluster Library command abuse for door locks and bulbs, Thread network credential theft, Matter commissioning chain analysis, and 6LoWPAN/IPv6 routing exploitation. Use when targeting smart-home or commercial mesh deployments, Zigbee-based door locks, lighting, or sensor networks.

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 helping a penetration tester exploit server-side template injection in a

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 helping a penetration tester exploit XXE injection. The target application

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 helping a penetration tester exploit OAuth 2.0 and OpenID Connect

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。

KRACK (CVE-2017-13077..082) and FragAttacks (CVE-2020-24586..588 + 26139-26147) — key reinstallation, fragmentation, and aggregation attacks against WPA2 supplicants. Covers Vanhoef's test scripts, viability against modern patched stacks (mostly mitigated post-2021), residual unpatched embedded devices and IoT vendors, and the practical limitations of these attacks in modern engagements. Use when assessing legacy supplicants, embedded clients, or vendors with poor patch cadence.

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 helping a penetration tester exploit server-side template injection in a

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。