「rubric」の検索結果

Scoring rubrics for all 5 pipeline layers (Vision, Architecture, IA, BE, FE). Use when auditing specs, running self-checks, or remediating ambiguity gaps.

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。

Determine ambiguity audit scope, enumerate source documents from filesystem, and persist rubric file bindings

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 board (Busabase App-in-Skill) that runs a fixed suite of mock test cases against a baseline vs candidate agent version and surfaces rubric-scored regressions before a release. Use when the user invokes $kelly-agent-eval or /kelly-agent-eval, wants to review agent-version regressions, compare baseline vs candidate quality, triage a release, or record a release approve/block decision. Deterministic mock rubric scores only — not a real LLM-judge call, and it never deploys anything.

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 LLM outputs using frontier models as judges. Use for pairwise model comparison, quality scoring with custom rubrics, and automated evaluation pipelines. Covers position bias mitigation, statistical significance, and generating preference data for DPO/RLHF.

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。

ゴール駆動オーケストレーション - rubric ファーストの自己修正 BUILDING ループ

CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md・skills・context・rules 等の指示ファイルの静的監査。指示ファイルの「レビューして」「監査して」「スリム化して」等の依頼時、/instructions-audit 実行時に使用。rubric で削除候補・hook/deny 移管・skill 化/Read-when 化・description 強化の4分類の指摘を修正案付きで出す。user-level と project-level 両対応。境界: 指摘の適用や個別追記は update-inst、セッション知見の反映は update-inst の retro モード、コードの監査は codebase-review。

絞り込んだ競合を九つの観点で採点し、根拠付きの比較カードと戦略の二軸図に整理するスキル。各社の強みや、自社が狙う領域の競合を確認します。

• 競合を共通の基準で比較したいとき
• 出典付きの競合紹介カード作成
• 戦略の二軸で競合を配置したいとき

公開前の文章やコードを二つの独立したエージェントが同じ基準で審査し、両方の合格まで修正と再審査を繰り返し、上限を超えたら人へ判断を引き継ぐスキル。

• 公開前に文章の事実関係を確認したいとき
• 顧客向け文章とブランドルールの照合
• 本番配布前に独立した審査を加えたいとき

論文や研究計画を共通の評価基準で読み、研究方法、根拠、引用、文章構成を点検するスキル。評価の理由と修正の優先順位、次に直す内容を整理します。

• 投稿前の論文を見直したいとき
• 引用が主張を支えるか確認したいとき
• 研究方法と限界を評価したいとき

競合のブランド表現やサービス、実績などを共通の基準で採点し、根拠付きの比較カードと戦略上の二軸図にまとめ、自社が狙う位置の競合を把握するスキル。

• 共通基準で競合を比較したいとき
• 根拠付きの競合カード作成
• 二つの戦略目標で競合を整理したいとき

When the user needs a comprehensive marketing plan for a client, a company they advise, or their own product. Also use when the user mentions "marketing plan," "growth plan," "GTM plan," "go-to-market plan," "AARRR plan," "90-day marketing plan," "12-month marketing roadmap," "fractional CMO plan," "fCMO plan," "market sizing," "TAM SAM SOM," "how big is this market," or "market research." Generates an exhaustive 13-section plan structured by AARRR (Acquisition, Activation, Retention, Referral, Revenue), customized to the client's current budget, team, and stage, mapped to future funding milestones, cross-referenced with the 139-idea marketing-ideas library and an embedded 17-section current-state audit rubric, with a marketing operations stack showing which skills and MCP/API integrations execute each part. Outputs a Notion-paste-ready markdown document. For positioning and ICP context before planning, see product-marketing. For stage-specific deep work, see onboarding, signup, emails, referrals, pricing.

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。

Runs the evals of a BMad skill through the agent harness the user works in and reports what they show: baseline against the bare model, variant against a stripped or prior version, quality against a rubric, and trigger accuracy of the description with an optional optimization loop. Use when the user asks to evaluate, benchmark, test the triggers of, grade, or compare versions of a skill, or when the bmad-toolsmith skill asks for an eval of a skill it built.

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。

为 Agent 建立或改进评估体系时使用——设计评估指标（Pass@k/Pass^k/成本）、搭建可重复运行的评估环境、选择确定性验证器或 LLM-as-a-Judge 及各自适用边界、编写 Rubric、做失败归因与回归任务、评估驱动的模型选型、判断统计显著性、建设可观测性与内部评估基础设施（消融、AB 测试、特性开关、提示词回归）、从 Benchmark 报告走到系统改进。

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 an Anthropic Cookbook notebook based on a rubric. Use whenever a notebook review or audit is requested.

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。

Provides qualitative-first, evidence-traceable developmental review of scholarly works and audit low-stakes research-assessment rubrics with optional local quality controls. Never use for ranking people or consequential 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。

Applies the DHDNA framework as an exploratory rubric for reasoning and writing patterns in supplied text. Used for explicit requests for DHDNA, cognitive-style reflection, a thinking-pattern profile, or comparisons of textual reasoning. Scores describe evidence in the sample, not validated psychological traits or personal 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。

This skill should be used when the user asks to "implement LLM-as-judge", "compare model outputs", "create evaluation rubrics", "mitigate evaluation bias", or mentions direct scoring, pairwise comparison, position bias, evaluation pipelines, or automated quality 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。

Build automated evaluation suites for AI agents using golden datasets, rubrics, and regression gates. Use when shipping agent features, validating prompt changes, or gating deployments on 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。

Runs a mock interview for a specific job description. Plays the interviewer in a chosen round (recruiter screen, hiring manager, behavioral, coding, system design, case, product sense, panel), persona and difficulty; asks one question at a time, probes vague answers, and gives quote-backed rubric scores after each answer (coach mode) or at the end (realistic). Model answers use only the user's real experience. Use when the user says "mock interview me", "interview me for this job", "practice interview", "pretend you're the interviewer", "grill me for this role", "run a behavioral round", "quick recruiter screen", "hiring-manager mock", "system design mock" or "case interview practice". With Reactive Resume MCP it reads the application and stories and logs the session. For a story bank, company brief, questions to ask or a real-interview debrief, interview-prep; for scheduling or thank-you notes, job-application-manager; for fixing the resume, resume-tailor; for negotiation practice, offer-negotiation.

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。

PluginEval quality methodology, covering dimensions, rubrics, and scoring formulas. Use this skill when understanding how plugin quality is measured, when interpreting a low score on a specific dimension, when deciding how to improve a skill's triggering accuracy or orchestration fitness, when setting score thresholds for your marketplace, or when explaining quality badges to external partners like Neon.

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。

Copilot left 14 review comments on your PR — half are nits. Hours of fix → reply → resolve → re-request, and each round lands MORE comments. This skill runs loop engineering: auto-triggers Copilot Code Review via GraphQL (no @copilot mention), triages every open thread (Copilot, humans, advanced-security) with a fix / decline / escalate rubric, dispatches parallel fix sub-agents that obey the repo build/test/lint conventions, commits per iteration, replies+resolves citing the pushed SHA, then re-triggers until HEAD is reviewed with zero threads awaiting the agent's reply (remaining open threads are explicit hand-offs to the human — escalated declines, design tradeoffs). You merge a clean PR; the bot runs it. Trigger phrases: "address copilot comments", "run a copilot review loop", "fix this PR", "iterate on copilot feedback". Repo-agnostic, gh CLI + PowerShell. Full autopilot needs repo Triage/Write; external PR authors get single-iteration mode plus manual re-trigger (UI 🔄 or substantive-commit push).

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。

Patterns and techniques for evaluating and improving AI agent outputs. Use this skill when: - Implementing self-critique and reflection loops - Building evaluator-optimizer pipelines for quality-critical generation - Creating test-driven code refinement workflows - Designing rubric-based or LLM-as-judge evaluation systems - Adding iterative improvement to agent outputs (code, reports, analysis) - Measuring and improving agent response 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。

Use before opening a PR, or whenever asked to self-review a diffusers contribution. Applies the same rubric as the `@claude` CI (checks the diff against references/review-rules.md, traces call paths for dead code). Reports findings grouped by severity, flagging what to fix before submitting (blocking issues + dead code) vs what to leave for the actual review. Report-only — does not edit files.

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。

Takes a pile of applications and turns it into a ranked shortlist, scored only against the job's stated rubric, with drafted replies to every candidate, scheduled interviews, and an onboarding checklist for whoever gets hired. Picks up where job-post-builder leaves off and carries the funnel through to first day, including the payroll setup handoff. Runs on Gmail and Google Calendar, deepens with Gusto, DocuSign, and Drive or M365, and works entirely from uploaded resumes with drafted replies the owner sends by hand. Use this whenever the owner has applicants to deal with — including phrasings like "I've got 40 resumes and no time," "who should I interview," "screen these applications," "help me narrow this down," "set up interviews for the top three," or "I need to tell the rest no." Reach for it when the owner mentions applicants, resumes, candidates, or being buried in a hiring inbox.

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。