「verdict」の検索結果

Reviews a proposal, business case, deck or product plan in character as a Chief Product Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage, product and adoption risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CPO review", "pressure-test this product plan", "what would a CPO say about this", "challenge the user evidence" or "check the roadmap opportunity cost". Do not use for positioning, messaging or launch marketing, use cmo-reviewer instead; for internal staff adoption of a rollout, use frontline-skeptic-reviewer; for what a change asks of paying customers, use customer-advocate-reviewer. 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。

Reviews a proposal, business case, deck or plan in character as a Chief Data Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings that cite the exact passage, data and AI governance risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CDO review", "pressure-test the data governance in this plan", "what would a CDO say about this", "check the metric definitions and data sources" or "prepare this for the data governance board". Do not use for security controls or third-party security risk, use ciso-reviewer instead; for contract, liability or regulatory terms, use general-counsel-reviewer. 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。

Reviews a proposal, business case, deck or plan in character as a Chief Marketing Officer archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict, findings cited to specific passages, marketing risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run a CMO review", "pressure-test the positioning", "what would a CMO say about this", "challenge the launch plan" or "check the messaging and audience". Do not use for price economics, margins or payback, use cfo-reviewer instead; for sales pipeline mechanics, use cro-reviewer. 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。

Cursorで任意のリファクタリング改善案を返すnative入口。共有refactor-advisorとrefactor-guidanceを読み、reviewerのVERDICTから分離する。

実装済みコードを、親から渡された受入条件と検証範囲に沿って確認する。既存テストと必要なアドホック確認の結果を、共通のCOVERAGE/VERDICT契約で返す。ユーザーが /tester と入力したら必ず使う。

Quality gate immediately after building: prove that what was just built actually works, while the context is still hot. Six steps: scope what changed, run live on real data, break it on purpose, show a counter or log proving it ran, root-cause any failure and re-run, then a verdict with evidence. Only a green verdict earns the word done. Supports an external multi-vendor review panel as a mid-step. Triggers: "/tt", "/test", "prove it works", "test what we 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。

Use Gemini as a third external reviewer alongside two other vendors: diff review with an APPROVE or REQUEST_CHANGES verdict, and QA-breaker duty in the post-build test ritual. Headless over REST with a CLI fallback, and verdicts go to a shared usage journal. Triggers: "/gemini review", "gemini opinion on this diff".

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 the user asks to "build our social posting calendar", "set weekly slots and queue depth per channel", or "plan the evergreen recycle rotation"; produces the always-on brand calendar — pillar allocation with hero/hub/help balance and give:ask targets (all labeled Estimated starting heuristics to calibrate against own analytics, never scored rules), per-channel recurring slots with queue depth, a batching workflow, an evergreen recycle cycle with freshness re-checks, deliberate open slots for realtime/trend moments fed by trend-spotter go/skip verdicts, and first-comment/publish-order ops — cadence commitments filed to the channel registry, and no batch ships to the queue without a SHIP verdict from social-quality-auditor pre-publish mode. Not for repurposing an existing asset or the paid-amplification calendar — use content-amplifier. 社媒排期/内容日历/栏目配比/常青循环复用

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 the user asks to "run my launch day", "build a launch day runbook / war room", or "decide CONTINUE or ROLLBACK after the push"; produces a pre-conditions gate check (launch-readiness-auditor SHIP verdict + the authoritative date in launch-registry — missing either stops the skill), a dated hour-blocked runbook with owners (morning irreversible pushes, daytime monitoring loop, evening consolidation), a forced observation-window verdict after every irreversible action against pre-declared kill criteria, a P0-P3 incident ladder with rollback playbooks, and T-0 status lines for the registry proposal protocol. Not for channel submission content and platform rules — use community-launch-runner; not for media replies — use press-media-relations. 发布日runbook/作战室/观察窗/回滚裁决/发布日指挥

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。

Implement ReasoningBank adaptive learning with AgentDB's 150x faster vector database. Includes trajectory tracking, verdict judgment, memory distillation, and pattern recognition. Use when building self-learning agents, optimizing decision-making, or implementing experience replay systems.

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。

Implement ReasoningBank adaptive learning with AgentDB's 150x faster vector database. Includes trajectory tracking, verdict judgment, memory distillation, and pattern recognition. Use when building self-learning agents, optimizing decision-making, or implementing experience replay systems.

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 rigorous visual QA across web, terminal, and paginated surfaces: an Apple HIG-based checklist, paired light/dark captures at phone and desktop widths, screenshot evidence, and a per-item PASS/FAIL verdict. Use for any UI build or change, or when asked whether a page, component, or TUI looks right or follows the platform's design guidelines.

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。

Browser QA of a PR against a running Twenty app, post-merge on main or pre-merge via the qa-scout label. Derives user-visible scenarios from the PR diff, executes them with the Playwright MCP browser, attests database effects over SQL, watches server and worker logs for swallowed errors, and writes a structured verdict plus a report. Invoked by ci-e2e-main.yaml after the deterministic e2e suite; also runnable locally against a dev stack.

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 changes with GitNexus from a GitHub PR URL or number, a branch/ref or commit range, or local staged, unstaged, and untracked changes. Use when the user asks for a code review, merge-risk assessment, regression hunt, missing-test analysis, or a verdict on whether a PR, branch, commit range, or local diff is safe.

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。

Triage acc's open promises and close them with honest real-world verdicts via acc_act(runtime="outcome").

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。

Read artifacts from the shared bench — the workspace where desks leave findings, verdicts, and work products for each other and the operator.

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。

Deep research framework for pre-IPO / private companies (Ant Group, SpaceX, Stripe, ByteDance...). Six analyst lenses — business model, financial forensics, competitive landscape, risk & governance, tech & IP, alternative-data signals — run in parallel via run_swarm, then cross-validated for signal consistency before any verdict. Built around the core challenge of private-company work: information is scarce, so every data point carries a confidence label (high / medium / low), inference is shown separately from fact, and 'I don't know' is a valid output. Outputs a fair-value range, exit-path analysis, and an information-gap map. Use for any unlisted company where you need to judge what the business is actually worth.

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。

Correlation-regime detection and crisis attribution — edge-density regime states with hysteresis, causal (no look-ahead) smoothing, regime-aware exposure context, first-mover crisis attribution with honest NAME / MACRO / AMBIGUOUS / ABSTAIN verdicts, and a correlation-rewiring leaderboard that catches slow bleed-outs

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。

Deep management assessment — the 'buying a stock is buying a person' layer. For a company or a named executive, evaluate integrity (promise-vs-delivery tracking, crisis behavior, stakeholder treatment), ability (strategic foresight, execution, capital-allocation record) and governance (equity structure, compensation, related-party deals). Outputs a weighted score across integrity / ability / capital-allocation / governance plus Duan Yongping's 3-question verdict ('would you hand this person your money for 10 years'). Use when standard research leaves management quality uncertain, or when management IS the investment thesis.

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 automated malware submission and analysis pipeline that collects suspicious files from endpoints and email gateways, submits them to sandbox environments and multi-engine scanners, and generates verdicts with IOCs for SIEM integration. Use when SOC teams need to scale malware analysis beyond manual sandbox submissions for high-volume alert triage.

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。

Visual Ralph orchestration for frontend UI from generated references, static references, or live URL targets, using $ultragoal with built-in visual verdict and pixel-diff evidence until the implementation matches and leaves a reproducible design system.

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。

Deduplicate and synthesize raw concept stubs into a tiered intellectual map (T1 Canon to T4 Riff), tracing idea evolution across sources over time. Transforms thousands of raw concept pages into a curated intellectual fingerprint. Includes a reversible curation cull pass (Phase 5) with hard keep/delete/merge verdicts, substance gates, grounding labels, cluster budgets, and merge-with-backlinks salience promotion.

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。

Investigate a GitHub issue or reported bug the way a seasoned maintainer would — form an independent model before reading the thread's theories, trace the mechanism and history, verify the diagnosis, and return a concise briefing with a verdict and fix direction. Use for triage, root-cause analysis, or re-investigation.

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。

Re-review a pull request after a push — reconcile the previous review against the new commits, look for new defects the push introduced, then a fresh pass over the whole PR, and finish with a verdict on the PR

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。