「contradictions」の検索結果

Semantic audit of the IDD instruction corpus for leaked session context, cross-file contradictions, fresh-memory completability gaps, automation blockers, and restatement-discipline drift. Use on request to audit .github/instructions, the issue-authoring skill bundle, and the installed agent entry files (CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, GEMINI.md, .github/copilot-instructions.md). Read-only — never edits files or mutates issues.

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。

Which docs in nuxt-crouton to trust and how to resolve contradictions between them. Use when two docs disagree, when a doc's claim doesn't match the code ("the README says packages/nuxt-crouton but that dir doesn't exist"), when deciding whether a guide/writeup is authoritative before following it, or when asked "is this doc current", "which doc wins", "why does CLAUDE.md say X but the code says Y". Also the reference for the supersession-banner practice.

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。

AID Phase 3 - Implementation Planning with consolidation-first approach. Resolves contradictions between PRD and Tech Spec, creates consolidated master document, then breaks down into actionable tasks and populates Jira. Includes sprint planning and risk assessment.

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。

Fresh-eyes review of the project's PRD for gaps, contradictions, vague phrasing, and unresolved decisions

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 this card's specs with fresh eyes for gaps, contradictions, and cross-spec 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。

Review a product requirement, PRD, brief, or meeting note before design or development; expose missing decisions, contradictions, edge cases, dependencies, and validation gaps without inventing business rules.

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。

Builds an evidence map for one document, section or contested claim: every factual claim extracted verbatim and numbered, its supporting passage in the supplied sources or UNKNOWN, the strength of that support as evidenced, contradictions between sources, and the specific question or document that would close each gap, returned in the chat as Markdown tables for the author or reviewer. Use when the user asks to "check what this document actually proves", "map the evidence behind these claims", "which of these statements are supported", "build an evidence map", "what would we need to back this up" or "is this claim substantiated". Do not use for requesting evidence of security controls from control owners, use control-evidence-request-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。

Synthesises a batch of customer feedback (survey answers, reviews, ticket and chat comments) into a DRAFT themed report: coded themes with record counts and shares, anonymised verbatim quotes cited to record codes, contradictions and unverified claims, and the follow-up questions to answer next. Produces no sentiment score or percentage positive as fact; ratings appear only as distributions with n. Use when the user asks to "theme this feedback", "what are customers saying", "summarise these survey answers", "analyse these reviews", "find the top complaints in these comments" or "code this voice of the customer data". Do not use for exit interviews, use exit-interview-synthesis instead; for sorting a live queue and drafting replies, use ticket-triage-pack; for project retrospectives, use lessons-learned-synthesis. 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。

Scan downstream specs for contradictions with locked decisions and apply approved fixes with consistency checks

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。

Pre-scan decision types, collect downstream references, classify contradictions, and write propagation scan report

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。

Focused Signals scout for PostHog projects moving data through pipelines. Watches the three delivery surfaces — CDP destinations and transformations (hog functions), batch exports, and hog flows (workflows/messaging) — for contradictions between configured state and actual delivery: functions the watcher quietly degraded or disabled, failure rates stepping above a pipeline's own baseline, batch export runs failing or stalling (a growing data gap), and active flows failing for the people they trigger on. Emits findings only when they clear the confidence bar; otherwise writes durable memory and closes out empty. Self-contained peer in the signals-scout-* fleet — no dependencies on other skills.

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。

Focused Signals scout for PostHog projects using feature flags. Watches the flag roster and the `$feature_flag_called` evaluation stream for contradictions between a flag's configured state and its real traffic: evaluation cliffs on healthy flags, ghost flags (code calling keys that no longer exist), response-distribution shifts with no corresponding flag edit, and flag debt (stale, fully-rolled-out, or dead flags still burning evaluations). Emits findings only when they clear the confidence bar; otherwise writes durable memory and closes out empty. Self-contained peer in the signals-scout-* fleet — no dependencies on other skills.

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 browser fingerprint for internal contradictions with the liarjs CLI - canvas, WebGL, WebGL2, WebGPU, audio, 220 fonts, WebRTC and timezone probes, scored against the TLS/HTTP/ASN view of the same request. Use when asked to run a browser fingerprint test, see what a fingerprint looks like, check canvas or WebGL fingerprint stability, compare a spoofed profile against a real browser, or find out whether a browser profile is self-consistent.

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。

Extract a thesis's load-bearing assumptions and scan for internal contradictions — the falsifiable claims the bull case requires, what would falsify each, and where the thesis's own Risks / Bear Case / research already argue against it. Use when user says "assumptions", "what must be true", "load-bearing assumptions", or "does [TICKER] contradict itself".

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 project and global memory for bloat, stale decisions, duplicates, contradictions, unsafe content, missing provenance, broken routing, and over-budget global files. Load when the user asks to audit memory, clean memory, check memory health, or verify memory quality.

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。

Track the full Toulmin epistemic ancestry of every claim produced by a multi-agent swarm. Each agent output is tagged with an argument chain (claim / data / warrant / relationship) derived from SwarmTracer spans and LineageEdge records, so operators can zoom into any sub-claim and see precisely which agents asserted it, what triggered each assertion, and how contradictions propagated or were synthesised away. The SwarmTracer pattern — wrapping the SwarmAgentExecutor to capture spans, record messages, and build a lineage graph — is the concrete runtime substrate. Argumentative lineage lifts that graph into the Toulmin vocabulary so reasoning provenance is both machine-queryable and human-interpretable.

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。