「sanity」の検索結果

Use before starting a product, feature, MVP, agent, automation, or integration build to identify the main pre-build risk and choose the smallest validation step. Trigger when the user asks whether to build, scope, validate, prioritize, or sanity-check an idea before implementation.

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。

Reverse DCF valuation, implied growth rate, market expectations analysis, reverse discounted cash flow, implied valuation assumptions, market-implied projections, DCF sanity check

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 a throwaway prototype to answer a design question. Use when the user wants to sanity-check whether a state model or logic feels right, or explore what a UI should look like.

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 and audit deterministic verification gates — a check that blocks a pipeline and can be shown to go red. Use when writing a calibration gate, CI check, validation script or pre-publication check for a numeric or empirical result; when a plausible-but-wrong value would survive review; when asking whether an existing test, linter rule or check could actually fail; and when a suite passes first try, passes suspiciously often, or was written by whatever produced the thing it checks. Triggers on "can this check fail", "known-bad", "negative control", "calibration gate", "sanity check my results", "is this test actually testing 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。

Build a throwaway prototype to answer a design question. Use when the user wants to sanity-check whether a state model or logic feels right, or explore what a UI should look like.

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。

Mid-conversation reflection skill that pauses execution and zooms out from detail-mode to honestly reassess direction, assumptions, and bias. Use when the user says 'reflect', 'take a step back', 'step back', 'zoom out', 'are we missing something', 'bigger picture', 'sanity check this', 'are we on track', 'are we overthinking this', 'forest for the trees', or any variation signaling intent to break out of detail-mode and reassess. Also trigger when the conversation has gone deep on implementation details without strategic check-in, or when the user shows signs of being stuck — that's often a signal the framing needs a reset, not more detail work. Intentionally low-intake: runs the 5-dimension analysis immediately when prior context is rich enough; asks one forcing clarifier only when invocation context is too thin to reassess from.

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, suggest, and sync tags and categories for blog posts across all major CMS platforms. Supports WordPress REST API, Shopify GraphQL, Ghost Content API, Strapi REST/GraphQL, and Sanity GROQ. Generates tag suggestions from content analysis (keyword frequency, heading extraction, semantic grouping), enforces minimum post-count thresholds to prevent thin tag archives, and syncs taxonomy via authenticated API calls. Use when user says "tags", "categories", "taxonomy", "tag suggestions", "sync tags", "WordPress tags", "Shopify tags".

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。

Brainstorms and debates approaches, then drives toward an actionable decision. Use whenever someone needs a thinking partner for a decision they're facing: 'discuss', 'debate', 'brainstorm', 'weigh options', 'tradeoffs', 'should I do X or Y', 'help me decide', 'I'm torn between', 'sanity check my thinking', or 'what do you think about'. The user must be asking for help reasoning through a choice — not asking to build, fix, evaluate, plan, or modify something (even if the topic involves this skill itself). Picks the right decision lens, surfaces tradeoffs and blind spots, pushes back when reasoning is genuinely weak, and never implements.

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 code for quality, correctness, and fit. Use when the user wants judgment on code that already exists — their own changes, a teammate's patch, a PR, branch, commit, diff, staged changes, or one or more files to look over. Activate on requests like review, look over, sanity check, critique, code review, or 'is this good?' The key signal is that the user wants evaluation of existing code and its tradeoffs, not implementation, debugging, or explanation. This skill works independently, but when plans, specs, task artifacts, or prior discussion exist, use them to understand why the code exists before judging 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。

Cut a new timepicker-ui release. Use when the user wants to bump the version, prepare a release, write/update the changelog, or sync version + changelog across README, CHANGELOG.md and the docs-app (changelog/what's-new/version strings). Drives the build-release subagent in an audit → approve → apply flow, then runs a sanity build. Does NOT git-commit/tag or npm-publish — proposes those for the user to 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。

Construct and score Grand Slam Offers using the Value Equation — sourced pain mining, dream outcome articulation, problems→solutions→trim-and-stack offer construction, guarantee/scarcity/bonus design, 1-10 scoring on the four Value Equation variables, pricing sanity pass, and compliance check. Use when "build an offer", "grand slam offer", "value equation", "offer stack", "make this offer irresistible", "design a guarantee", "hormozi offer", "why isn't my offer selling", "pricing and packaging for my offer", or any request to design, score, or rework a commercial offer.

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。

修改/重构/Bug 修复后避免老问题复发时使用。适用于版本回归、修复后回归、重构验证。融合 Impact Analysis、Test Suite Pruning、Smoke/Sanity/Full 三层套件。

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 implementation plan quality across 8 dimensions (requirement-coverage, task-completeness, dependency-validity, scope-sanity, artifact-wiring, risk-assessment, testability, estimation-quality) and returns pass/fail with per-dimension scores.

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。

Audits Claude Code repositories. Two-phase workflow — Phase 1 sweeps 14 hygiene categories (permissions, hooks, CLAUDE.md bloat, Skills hygiene, process-abstraction, plus structural) and an optional 7-layer leak check. Phase 2 executes [APPROVED] markers from the report file. Use for repo cleanup, pre-distribution sanity, post-feature hygiene, environment audit, process-abstraction discovery. Trigger on "audit my CC repo," "sweep my repository for hygiene," "check this CC environment," "find process abstraction candidates," "review my CLAUDE.md," "clean up my .claude directory," "pre-distribution hygiene check," "find layer leaks in my CC setup." Routes structural findings to rootnode-cc-design REMEDIATE. Composes with rootnode-critic-gate. CC-only — does not scan Claude Projects. Do NOT use for building a Skill (use rootnode-skill-builder), compiling a prompt (use rootnode-prompt-compilation), scoring a single prompt (use rootnode-prompt-validation), or auditing a Project (use rootnode-project-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 a B2B SaaS founder needs to choose, prioritize, or rebalance customer acquisition channels — deciding outbound vs inbound, paid vs PLG, where to put marketing budget, or sanity-checking CAC, LTV:CAC, and payback. Also for channel-specific playbooks (cold email, LinkedIn, paid social, community, partnerships) and channel-mix audits. Not for closing tactics (use sales-skill) or copy (use copywriter-skill).

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。

Analyze queried data for trends, week-over-week comparisons, distributions, funnels, cohorts, top-N lists, anomalies, sanity checks, and report-ready findings. Use after or alongside ClickHouse queries when the user wants insight rather than raw rows.

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。

Analyze queried data for trends, week-over-week comparisons, distributions, funnels, cohorts, top-N lists, anomalies, sanity checks, and report-ready findings. Use after or alongside ClickHouse queries when the user wants insight rather than raw rows.

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。

PRのレビュー報告書を作成する。bugや脆弱性の調査だけでなく、exportされた対話コンテキスト・PR概要欄・実装されたコードの整合性を確認し、実装者の正気を疑う。 ユーザーが「PRのレビュー報告書を書いて」「対話コンテキストと共にコードレビューして」「このPRの正気を疑って」と言った時に使用する。

Build a throwaway prototype to answer a design question. Use when the user wants to sanity-check whether a state model or logic feels right, or explore what a UI should look like.

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 spreadsheet for formula accuracy, errors, and common financial-model mistakes. Use for selected ranges, single sheets, or whole-workbook model checks including balance-sheet balance, cash tie-out, roll-forwards, and logic sanity.

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 task needs the judgment of an Advertising and Promotions Manager — building a media plan backward from an objective and budget, briefing or evaluating creative against a brief, negotiating with agencies/media vendors, sanity-checking vendor-reported attribution, or reading a post-campaign debrief to separate delivery performance from response performance.

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。

Qualify a sales opportunity using the MEDDIC framework. Use when the user says "qualify this deal", "is this deal real", "MEDDIC qualification", "MEDDICC framework", "should I pursue this opportunity", "deal review", "how qualified is this prospect", "pipeline review prep", "forecast this deal", "sanity check on this opportunity", or wants to assess whether a sales opportunity is worth pursuing and at what pipeline stage.

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, suggest, and sync tags and categories for blog posts across all major CMS platforms. Supports WordPress REST API, Shopify GraphQL, Ghost Content API, Strapi REST/GraphQL, and Sanity GROQ. Generates tag suggestions from content analysis (keyword frequency, heading extraction, semantic grouping), enforces minimum post-count thresholds to prevent thin tag archives, and syncs taxonomy via authenticated API calls. Use when user says "tags", "categories", "taxonomy", "tag suggestions", "sync tags", "WordPress tags", "Shopify tags".

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。

Assesses the quality and completeness of a genome annotation with BUSCO (conserved single-copy ortholog recovery), OMArk (proteome completeness, consistency, and contamination), CheckM2 (prokaryotic completeness/contamination), and a gene-set sanity panel (gene count, mono-exonic fraction, protein-length distribution, mRNA:gene ratio, coding density). Covers the assembly-BUSCO-vs-proteome-BUSCO diagnostic, what BUSCO-Duplicated really means, why gene count is a vanity metric, and the QC of transferred annotations. Use when judging whether an annotation is good enough to publish or submit, diagnosing a suspect annotation, or comparing annotation completeness across pipelines.

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。