1,534 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Standardize SRS and FRS specifications for technical behavior, interfaces, data contracts, quality constraints, and verification mapping. Use when writing SRS, functional specification, system behavior requirements, API/data contracts, or non-functional thresholds.
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 wants to design, redesign, shape, critique, audit, polish, clarify, distill, harden, optimize, adapt, animate, colorize, extract, or otherwise improve a frontend interface. Covers websites, landing pages, dashboards, product UI, app shells, components, forms, settings, onboarding, and empty states. Handles UX review, visual hierarchy, information architecture, cognitive load, accessibility, performance, responsive behavior, theming, anti-patterns, typography, fonts, spacing, layout, alignment, color, motion, micro-interactions, UX copy, error states, edge cases, i18n, and reusable design systems or tokens. Also use for bland designs that need to become bolder or more delightful, loud designs that should become quieter, live browser iteration on UI elements, or ambitious visual effects that should feel technically extraordinary. Not for backend-only or non-UI tasks.
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 Elixir/Phoenix technical debt — duplicates, refactoring; Use when asked about code quality, cleanup, or what…
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 Elixir/Phoenix technical debt — duplicates, refactoring opportunities, credo issues. Use when asked about code quality, cleanup, or what to improve.
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 Elixir/Phoenix technical debt — duplicates, refactoring opportunities, credo issues. Use when asked about code quality, cleanup, or what to improve.
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。
Constructs technical Suno style prompts for the current model family (v6, v6-wild, v6-mini), selects models and generation settings, and optimizes prompts. Use when creating or refining Suno prompts for track generation.
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。
Scans lyrics for pronunciation risks and prevents Suno mispronunciations. Use when writing lyrics with proper nouns, technical terms, homographs, or non-English words.
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。
Guide users through a structured workflow for co-authoring documentation. Use when user wants to write documentation, proposals, technical specs, decision docs, or similar structured content. This workflow helps users efficiently transfer context, refine content through iteration, and verify the doc works for readers. Trigger when user mentions writing docs, creating proposals, drafting specs, or similar documentation tasks.
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。
Agents should invoke this skill for academic or technical papers, arXiv/PubMed/IEEE/ACM links, PDFs, methodology review, limitations, practical implications, or extracting findings for engineering 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。
HIPAA compliance - PHI protection, technical/administrative/physical safeguards, minimum necessary standard, BAA requirements, de-identification, access logging
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 technical plans from thoughts/shared/plans with verification
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 technical plans from thoughts/shared/plans with verification
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。
Gradual rollout strategies, kill switches, A/B testing integration, flag lifecycle management, and technical debt prevention.
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 comprehensive technical documentation including API docs (OpenAPI/Swagger), code documentation (TypeDoc/Sphinx), documentation sites (Docusaurus/MkDocs), Architecture Decision Records (ADRs), and diagrams (Mermaid/PlantUML). Use when documenting APIs, libraries, systems architecture, or building developer-facing documentation sites.
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。
Translate SQL queries into plain language business logic. Use when documenting queries, explaining analysis to non-technical stakeholders, code reviewing for correctness, or building a query catalog.
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。
Answer a hard question by fanning it out to a PANEL of models running in parallel — each answering independently with web search and bash, none seeing the others' work — then having Opus 4.8 judge every response into a structured analysis (consensus, contradictions, partial coverage, unique insights, blind spots) and write a final answer grounded in it. The panel is two independent Opus 4.8 runs (slug opus4.8-4.8), Opus 4.8 + GPT-5.5 via codex (opus4.8-gpt5.5), Opus 4.8 + Gemini 3.1 Pro via agy (opus4.8-gemini3.1pro), or all three (opus4.8-gpt5.5-gemini3.1pro). Opus always judges and writes the final answer — the pipeline can't be reversed. Runs on local CLI subscriptions (no metered API), and saves a timestamped provenance .md per run. Use this whenever the user asks to "run it through Fusion", says /fusion, wants a multi-model / panel / ensemble answer, wants a question cross-checked across models, or wants a higher-confidence answer with consensus and blind spots surfaced — even if they don't say "fusion". General-purpose: any topic (research, law, strategy, technical, personal). Best for high-stakes research, design calls, and debugging where being confidently wrong is expensive.
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 websites for SEO, technical, content, security, JS rendering, and AI readiness using SEOmator CLI. Returns LLM-optimized reports with health scores across 373 rules and 20 categories, and can diff two audits to show what a deploy changed. Use when analyzing websites, debugging SEO issues, checking site health, or comparing a site before and after a change.
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。
Render an interactive, self-contained HTML companion for a GEO content brief (04-content-brief) or a publish-ready draft (05-production), so a NON-technical client reviewer (founder, organizer staff, the domain expert filling slots) can fill REQUIRED-FILL slots, leave section-level comments, and approve/return work in the browser instead of editing Markdown. Use when a brief or draft needs to go to a client/expert for review, or when building the briefs/index.html entry page for a client folder. The reviewer's input comes back as a JSON file that 04-content-brief Step 9 ingests. Visual quality is delegated to the frontend-design 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。
Execute autonomous multi-step research using Google Gemini Deep Research Agent. Use for: market analysis, competitive landscaping, literature reviews, technical research, due diligence. Takes 2-10 minutes but produces detailed, cited reports. Costs $2-5 per task.
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。
Comprehensive documentation specialist covering API documentation, technical writing, design documentation, migration guides, and changelog generation. Use when creating OpenAPI/Swagger specs, generating SDKs, writing user guides, creating README files, documenting architecture, writing design specs, creating ADRs, writing migration guides, or generating changelogs from git commits. Handles versioning, examples, developer experience, and user-facing documentation.
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。
Design systems, plan implementations, review architecture decisions - Use when you need to plan a complex feature, design system architecture, or make high-level technical 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。
Guide users through a structured workflow for co-authoring documentation. Use when user wants to write documentation, proposals, technical specs, decision docs, or similar structured content. This workflow helps users efficiently transfer context, refine content through iteration, and verify the doc works for readers. Trigger when user mentions writing docs, creating proposals, drafting specs, or similar documentation tasks.
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 complete mathematical-modeling competition paper with an atomic checklist covering abstract readability, page structure, typography, headings, pagination, figures, tables, equations, anonymity, metadata, visual balance, and page allocation. Return the review in chat or Markdown by default, and provide the bundled single-sheet checklist when the user requests a reusable form. Use when the user provides a PDF or Word paper and asks for a full-paper format and writing-compliance audit; do not replace technical model correctness review.
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 and audit privacy controls in product and infrastructure — GDPR, CCPA / CPRA, LGPD, PIPEDA. Covers data minimization, lawful basis, consent management, data subject access requests (DSARs — access, deletion, portability), data processing agreements, DPIA / TIA, breach notification timing, data classification, and the technical implementation of 'right to be forgotten' across backups, caches, analytics, and third parties. Use when the user mentions 'GDPR,' 'CCPA,' 'CPRA,' 'data privacy,' 'privacy engineering,' 'data subject access request,' 'DSAR,' 'right to deletion,' 'right to be forgotten,' 'data portability,' 'consent management,' 'cookie consent,' 'data minimization,' 'DPIA,' 'data protection impact assessment,' 'breach notification,' 'BAA,' 'DPA,' 'data processing agreement,' 'sub-processor,' 'cross-border data transfer,' 'SCCs,' or needs to implement or review privacy controls.
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。