「findings」の検索結果

Use when a task needs the judgment of an Energy Auditor — running a blower-door/duct-leakage diagnostic sequence on a home or light-commercial building, testing combustion appliances for worst-case backdraft risk before recommending air sealing, reconciling utility billing history against walkthrough findings, ranking retrofit measures by savings-to-investment ratio (SIR) for a weatherization or utility rebate program, or writing the prioritized scope of work an install crew executes without the auditor on site. Distinct from an energy-engineer (industrial/commercial capital planning, IPMVP measurement and verification, calibrated simulation) — this role owns the field diagnostics and the residential/light-commercial audit-to-scope handoff.

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 a licensed General Dentist — assessing caries risk and deciding restore-vs-monitor, choosing a restorative material for a specific tooth, phasing a multi-procedure treatment plan by urgency and budget, reading a radiograph for diagnostic findings, or deciding when a case exceeds general-practice scope and needs a specialist referral.

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 a Diagnostic Medical Sonographer — deciding whether a duplex, compression, or graded-compression ultrasound study is diagnostic versus technically limited, choosing when to interrupt a scanning protocol to escalate a real-time critical finding, setting scan technique and ALARA (TI/MI) parameters for a given exam type, or drafting the technical worksheet and preliminary findings a physician will interpret and sign.

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 a Compliance Officer — deciding whether a suspected violation triggers a mandatory regulatory filing or disclosure, designing or risk-rating a compliance monitoring program, running a violation investigation to root cause, briefing a board/audit committee on compliance findings, or responding to a regulatory exam finding.

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 a Coroner or medicolegal death investigator — determining whether a death is reportable/jurisdictional, distinguishing cause of death from manner of death, estimating a postmortem interval from scene findings, deciding whether an autopsy or toxicology screen is warranted, or completing a death certificate under scrutiny.

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 a certified athletic trainer — triaging an on-field or on-court injury, deciding same-day return-to-play vs. refer-out, running a concussion sideline assessment and graduated return-to-sport progression, recognizing exertional heat stroke or another sudden-death emergency, or writing the objective findings that justify a clearance decision.

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 Administrative Law Judge, Adjudicator, or Hearing Officer — applying a mandatory sequential/structured evaluation framework in required order, weighing conflicting medical or vocational opinion evidence using specific regulatory factors, writing findings that explicitly address significant contrary evidence in the record, drafting a credibility/consistency finding tied to specific record citations, or checking whether a draft decision would survive substantial-evidence 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。

Guide for integrating GTEx tissue expression data with ENCODE regulatory elements. Use when users need to check if a gene is expressed in a tissue, correlate regulatory elements with expression, or validate ENCODE findings against GTEx. Trigger on: GTEx, tissue expression, gene expression levels, expression atlas, eQTL, tissue-specific expression, TPM values.

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。

Multi-agent review resolution with trust-but-verify methodology. Accepts a PR number/URL or a local code-review report file. Extracts review comments, verifies each with parallel agents using confidence scoring (0-100), filters false positives, presents a triage report for approval, then applies fixes and replies. Use when user runs /resolve-review, mentions "resolve PR comments", "address review feedback", "fix PR suggestions", "handle review comments", or "resolve review findings".

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。

Multi-agent code review using the Pragmatic Quality framework. Orchestrates parallel review agents (CLAUDE.md compliance, bug scanning, git history, security) with independent confidence scoring to produce high-signal findings. Use when user runs /code-review, /review:code-review, requests a "code review", "review my changes", "PR review", or mentions "review diff", "review branch".

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 codebase against well-known software design principles: SOLID, DRY, YAGNI, KISS, Law of Demeter, Separation of Concerns, Composition over Inheritance, and the code-relevant 12-Factor subset. Scores findings by impact and effort, runs adversarial debate on contested violations, and generates a prioritized DESIGN_AUDIT.md. Use when reviewing code quality beyond what linters catch, assessing design health before a refactor, or onboarding to an unfamiliar codebase. Can be invoked standalone or delegated from tech-debt.

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。

Systematic technical debt analysis across architecture, testing, documentation, and infrastructure. Investigates the codebase, scores findings by impact and effort, and generates a prioritized TECH_DEBT.md remediation plan. Delegates to specialized skills for code quality (scout) and linting (lint-fix). Use when assessing overall project health, planning cleanup sprints, or onboarding to an unfamiliar codebase.

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。

Run a full retrospective and dev cycle analysis. Chains /recall → /new-features to reconstruct what went wrong, extract lessons learned, identify rework patterns, and synthesize feature ideas from the findings. Triggers: retrospective, retro, dev cycle analysis, what went wrong, lessons learned, postmortem, sprint retro.

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 Opportunity Solution Trees using Teresa Torres' framework for structured product discovery. Use this skill when: - You need to map a desired outcome to opportunities, solutions, and experiments - You want to decide WHAT to build next based on user research and discovery data - You have workshop findings, pilot feedback, or user research to structure into actionable options - You need a visual tree diagram showing the path from outcome to testable experiments

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。

Communicate data insights to non-technical stakeholders in a structured, persuasive format. Use when the user says "present these findings", "explain this analysis to leadership", "make a data presentation", "tell the story behind the data", "translate this into a business narrative", "make this insight actionable", "stakeholder readout", "executive summary of results", or needs to turn analysis output into a decision-ready document or slide deck.

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 repo's agent context — CLAUDE.md files, codebase docs, skills, and tool/MCP designs — against Anthropic's Claude 5 context-engineering guidance ("unhobbling": Anthropic cut ~80% of Claude Code's system prompt with no eval loss). Finds overconstraint, conflicting instructions, redundancy, stale facts, and missing "unknown knowns"; produces a scored findings report with concrete rewrites, then applies approved fixes. Use when someone says "audit my CLAUDE.md", "context audit", "unhobble this repo", "review our agent docs/skills/tools", or after upgrading to Claude 5-generation models.

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。

Run a deterministic, read-only health check on an Obsidian wiki. Use for lint, vault health check, audit wiki health, find orphans, find dead links, frontmatter audit, provenance audit, or wiki audit. Reports graph, link, frontmatter, provenance-ledger, empty-section, and stale-index findings; it does not reason broadly or repair 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。

Run an adversarial two-phase code review of a change with TWO independent reviewers — Claude and Codex — who review alone, then cross-examine each other's findings, then Claude synthesizes a single weighted verdict. Use when the user says "/adversarial-review", "adversarial review", "review this with Codex", "get Codex to review", "two-reviewer review", "cross-examine this PR", or wants a second independent model to grade a change before merge.

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。

Queries and retrieves active security findings, external exposures, toxic combinations, vulnerabilities, threats, and sensitive data risks from Google Cloud Security Command Center. Use when retrieving details for a security finding by its name, validating finding scope (e.g., verifying findingClass is TOXIC_COMBINATION, VULNERABILITY, EXTERNAL_EXPOSURE, or THREAT), or fetching finding details for triage. Don't use to draft remediations, apply patches, or execute configurations.

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。

Fix a bug using Scout → Diagnose → Fix → Review → Finalize. Use when the user pastes an error message, stack trace, or test failure, or says "fix this bug", "something's broken", "tests are failing", "I'm getting an error". Also accepts `--from-quality <report>` or `--from-test <report>` to fix exactly the findings/failures a report lists. Modes (pick one): --fast (trivial errors — lint, type, build — skip scout and review), --hard (mandatory review, no auto-approve).

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。

Fix a bug using Scout → Diagnose → Fix → Review → Finalize. Use when the user pastes an error message, stack trace, or test failure, or says "fix this bug", "something's broken", "tests are failing", "I'm getting an error". Also accepts `--from-quality <report>` or `--from-test <report>` to fix exactly the findings/failures a report lists. Modes (pick one): --fast (trivial errors — lint, type, build — skip scout and review), --hard (mandatory review, no auto-approve).

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。

Run a task iteratively over a user-specified duration by dispatching subagents. The orchestrator stays strictly linear and time-checked, but each iteration fans out MULTIPLE subagents in parallel over independent units (and those subagents may fan out further). Shared state — a compact progress digest and a growing environment cheatsheet — lives on disk and is passed to every subagent BY REFERENCE, killing the per-subagent rediscovery tax. Every subagent first reads an initialiser preamble that points it at that shared state and makes it write findings back, so the cheatsheet populates itself; role prompts are produced ONCE on the filesystem by a single scaffold command and dispatched by path, never re-typed per dispatch. Subagents persist their results to disk and return only a tiny status, so the orchestrator's context stays small and lasts. The orchestrator classifies the goal as FINITE or OPEN-ENDED: finite lists may finish early; open-ended goals use the full duration, never idle, never manufacture busywork. Use when the user gives a task and a duration and wants it ground out iteratively by subagents over that time.

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。

Run a self-retrospective on a SKMTC-related session — generator authoring, CLI configuration, debugging, or any sustained interaction involving `@skmtc/core`, `@skmtc/cli`, or `@skmtc/gen-*` packages. Captures three distinct outputs: (1) friction entries (mistakes, surprises, overridden defaults, multi-cycle struggles), (2) a "knowledge acquired" block recording facts the agent learned during the session that weren't in its training — the primary signal for doc gaps — and (3) a closing priority list ranking the top 2-3 findings for docs/skills triage. Wins are logged only when they identify a pattern worth codifying that isn't already in a skill. Use this skill when the user asks to "retro", "skmtc retro", "log friction", "reflect on this session", "what did we learn", "run a retrospective", or after substantive SKMTC work (generator authoring, multi-step debugging, non-trivial CLI configuration) where capturing observations would help improve skills, docs, or SKMTC itself. Distinct from the `skmtc-cli` and `skmtc-generator` skills — those guide *doing* the work; this skill captures observations *about* the work. Do not invoke this skill during ordinary work; it is end-of- session (or mid-session-checkpoint) only.

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。

Consult the Eldar — audit a project's moflo + Claude Code setup for portable, high-leverage gaps and guide remediation. Default mode is read-only audit with severity-ranked findings; --fix presents an interactive triage menu and walks the user through each chosen fix (healer, missing CLAUDE.md, sparse guidance, hook/MCP wiring, empty memory namespaces, stack→guidance gaps). Use when starting in a new project, when Claude feels lost or inefficient, when guidance/CLAUDE.md is sparse, or as a periodic health 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。