1,296 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Scholarly research companion using Knows sidecar spec (.knows.yaml). Generates, validates, reviews, queries, and compares structured research-paper sidecars, and fetches them from knows.academy. Use for academic literature search, survey synthesis, paper authoring assistance, and peer review with token-efficient claim/evidence/relation access.
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。
Search academic literature and generate, validate, or compare Knows paper sidecars. Use for claim/evidence analysis and literature synthesis.
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。
Detect insecure JWT (JSON Web Token) implementations in a codebase using a two-phase approach: first map all JWT issuance and verification sites to understand the token lifecycle and signing configuration, then check each verification site for exploitable weaknesses such as algorithm confusion, missing signature verification, weak secrets, header injection, and missing claim validation. Requires sast/architecture.md (run sast-analysis first). Outputs findings to sast/jwt-results.md. If no JWT usage is found in Phase 1, Phase 2 is skipped. Use when asked to find JWT, token forgery, or authentication bypass bugs.
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 the unprimed sub agent as a second set of eyes before accepting visual work — MANDATORY before declaring any user-reported visual bug fixed or claiming a visual change verified; primed eyes pass defects fresh eyes catch.
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。
Records visual proof while testing UI behavior — the agent tests the app hands-on via computer use while a screen recording with structured test/assertion annotations captures the session — then posts the video and a results summary to the PR and tracker issue. Use whenever a change needs verifiable evidence that it works, instead of prose claims — including headless environments (scripted screenshots and probes) and non-UI changes (measured numbers, output pairs).
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。
Verifies truthfulness, accuracy, and link integrity of content before publishing. Catches fabricated statistics, dead URLs, misattributed sources, and company claims that contradict the brand DNA.
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。
Puts a built website live on a free HTTPS link, or your own .com with no DNS. Use when the user says "put it online", "go live", "make it live", "put this live", "publish my site", "share it with friends", "send my friends a link", "get a link", "make it public", "it only works on localhost" or "get a .com", or asks to deploy or host a site built with an AI tool (Claude Code, Cursor, Codex, Windsurf, Lovable, Bolt, v0, ChatGPT), or mentions DropTheHassle, and has not picked another host. Covers building first, CLI or MCP setup, deploying, the claim link, the live check, linking a server part the user hosts on AWS, Google Cloud, DigitalOcean or their own server with set_backend, and domain search. The agent never spends money. The human pays.
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 claims that work is done or shipped against the diff or repo. Use when: asked whether something really got done, even if it looks obvious.
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。
Freshly judge whether a finished change and its claims meet original acceptance: PASS, FAIL or NOT_PROVEN. Use when: asked for a go/no-go, sign-off or independent verdict.
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 only after explicit Codex `$superloopy:superloopy-research` or Claude Code `/superloopy:superloopy-research` invocation, a research task started with a leading `loopy` or `루피` (such as `loopy research`), or an active Superloopy loop explicitly routing a research deliverable here. Evidence-backed Superloopy research orchestration with automatic advisory usage targets, parallel read-only lanes, per-retrieval verdicts, graded and dated sources, empirical verification, a priced claim ledger, cited synthesis, and optional reports. Do not activate from research, investigate, look-up, summarize, deep-dive, report, or similar vocabulary alone, in any language; ordinary questions, debugging, and implementation context-gathering stay with their primary workflows.
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。
Periodic trust sweep of persistent memory and durable knowledge notes - re-verifies environment-dependent claims against the live environment, stamps last_verified + confidence, and proposes archiving drifted 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。
Generate meaning-carrying editorial data-illustrations in the monotykamary / Linear aesthetic (near-black grayscale, Inter display + mono labels, hairline framed figures) with a single coral accent. This is a GENERATIVE GUIDE, not a template gallery: it teaches the "claim -> geometry" method so any session can invent the RIGHT figure for what a post actually argues, then render it as a self-contained, theme-aware, reduced-motion-safe HTML/SVG figure. Use when writing/illustrating a blog post, essay, spec, or slide and you want a chart, diagram, or illustration that carries a thesis (not decoration) in the house style. Triggers: "make a chart/diagram/illustration for this", "visualize this argument", "monotykamary/Linear style figure", "editorial graphic".
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 generated or changed documentation before it ships — READMEs, API references, docstrings, PHPDoc/JSDoc, changelogs, tutorials, and doc sites. Best used reactively after an agent writes or edits docs, after code changes documented behavior, or before publishing docs. Use when the user says 'review the docs', 'is this documentation accurate', 'update the docs', 'write a README', 'document this API', 'add a docstring', or 'add a changelog entry'. Core job: verify every referenced function, flag, endpoint, config key, and code sample against the source; catch docs-vs-code drift; strip filler and unverifiable claims. DO NOT USE for production code review (use clean-code-guard), test review (use test-guard), marketing copy or blog posts, prose style editing of non-technical writing, or documentation site theming.
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 strengthening AISTATS reproducibility evidence, including the official reproducibility checklist, statistical assumptions, proofs, datasets, hyperparameters, random seeds, compute, uncertainty estimates, baselines, code/data release statements, and checklist-to-claim consistency audits.
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 designing or auditing AISTATS experiments, simulations, baselines, statistical tests, uncertainty estimates, ablations, random seeds, hyperparameters, compute, dataset handling, and claim-to-evidence fit, with emphasis on experiments that validate theorems rather than chase leaderboards.
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 revising an AISTATS paper for concise AI-statistics framing, theorem-and-experiment clarity, 8-page two-column compression, double-blind wording, reproducibility clarity, statistically careful claims, and assumption-labeling discipline that survives statistician reviewers.
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 articulating why an Agricultural Systems (AgSy) result matters — its relevance for farm design, management, decision support, or policy. AgSy values systems analysis that informs a decision, so this is what separates an AgSy paper from a methods demo. It frames implications honestly within the model's scope; it does not over-claim or invent impact.
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 deciding what characterization and experimental detail an Advanced Materials manuscript must show to prove its structure–property claim, and what belongs in the Experimental Section and Supporting Information. Partitions and stress-tests methods; does not design figures or run analysis.
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 judging whether a research idea fits Administrative Science Quarterly (ASQ) and has the *surprising* theoretical insight ASQ demands. Sharpens the puzzle and the contribution claim; it does not design the study or write theory sections.
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 drafting or revising the prose of an AEJ: Economic Policy manuscript — especially the abstract and introduction — to translate causal estimates into a clear policy takeaway without overclaiming. Shapes the policy-first narrative and house style; it does not design identification or build the welfare 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。
Use when designing or auditing ACM CCS experiments, attack demonstrations, adaptive-attack defense evaluations, security measurements, baselines, overhead and cost reporting, ablations, and claim-to-evidence fit, with emphasis on evidence that survives an adversarial program committee rather than leaderboard wins.
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 revising an ACM MM (ACM Multimedia) paper for house style — putting the cross-modal contribution on the first page, framing media (figures, video, audio) as evidence rather than decoration, making the fusion the visible claim, and compressing the argument into a 6-8 page ACM sigconf body with references-only overflow.
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 revising an ACM CCS paper for a precise threat model, calibrated attack/defense claims, 12-page ACM sigconf compression, double-blind wording, adaptive-evaluation honesty, and the security house style that survives an adversarial SIGSAC program committee.
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 articulating what an Accounting, Organizations and Society (AOS) manuscript contributes — converting findings into a claim that changes how the field understands accounting's social, organizational, behavioral or institutional operation. Frames the payoff; it does not produce new analysis (aos-data-analysis).
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。