「judgment」の検索結果

Use when a task needs the judgment of an Agricultural Technician — designing a soil, tissue, or seed sampling plan, interpreting pest scouting counts against an economic threshold, calibrating spray/seeding equipment, or troubleshooting a field data discrepancy before it reaches the agronomist or scientist who acts on 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。

Use when a task needs the judgment of an Aerospace Engineer — reconciling a vehicle mass/weight budget against a certification limit, computing a structural margin of safety, choosing a means of compliance for an FAA certification basis, tracing a weight-growth overrun back to a design decision, or evaluating a propulsion/aerodynamics tradeoff against a range or payload requirement.

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 Sales Agent — pricing an ad-inventory package against a client budget, building a media-kit pitch, protecting yield on scarce inventory while moving remnant, or forecasting close rate on a sales pipeline. Sell-side: this role sells a publisher's or station's own ad space/time to advertisers, the opposite side of the table from a buyer-side advertising-promotions-manager who purchases media on a client's behalf.

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。

Use when a task needs the judgment of an Adult ESL/Basic Education Instructor — placing a new adult learner using standardized assessment scores, designing life-context-relevant lesson content for working adults, tracking NRS-reportable level gains, addressing attendance/retention barriers, or preparing a learner for GED/HSE or workplace English benchmarks.

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 Animal Control Worker — responding to a dog-bite or animal-attack call, determining rabies-exposure quarantine protocol, evaluating a dangerous-dog classification referral, planning a cruelty/neglect investigation and removal, or selecting a capture/restraint method for a stray or wildlife-in-structure call.

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 discernment habits: nudges and checklists for evaluating claims, spotting manipulation, and thinking clearly under pressure. Use when you want better judgment about what to believe and share.

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 monthly money check-in with an AI assistant: categorize spending, spot leaks, set one savings target, and view it through the 50/30/20 lens — judgment-free. Use once a month to stay aware of where your money goes. General educational information, not financial advice.

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 work as an explicit event-driven state machine executed by subagents. The orchestrator is the runtime from the canonical loop — `state, effects = init(machine); execute(effects); while state is active: event = nextEvent(); state, effects = transition(machine, state, event); execute(effects); return state.output`. All routing judgment is authored ONCE, at plan time, into a machine file (states, event alphabet, transition table, budgets, final states); at runtime the orchestrator does pure table lookups and dispatches effects — it never decides, never authors, never ingests artifacts. Subagent/sync protocol is the timeboxed-iterating one: role prompts scaffolded once to disk and dispatched BY PATH, an initialiser preamble every subagent reads first, a self-populating cheatsheet, per-unit files, tiny structured returns, independent measurement gate. Use when the user says "workmachine", "run this as a state machine", "state-machine this", or when a goal has a small number of clearly named phases with explicit outcomes (built / passed / failed / blocked) and you want the routing to be auditable rather than judged on the fly. For clock-driven loops use timeboxed-iterating; for wide graphs with judged edge criteria use workgraph.

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 HyperFrames video composition from a brief/script autonomously. Uses separated builder and critic subagents — builders never review their own work. Quality decisions are grounded in project context (identity, audience, goals) and established visual/motion design principles. Measurable criteria (text size, contrast, overflow) are verified with tooling, not visual judgment. Use when the user says "make this video", "implement this brief", "build this composition", or provides a video script/brief to implement.

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。

Adaptive learning for moflo agents via ReasoningBank: trajectory storage, verdict judgment, memory distillation, consolidation, and MMR retrieval. Use when building agents that should improve from experience across runs.

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。

Qualitative quality review of game design documents — answers "is this design good, and does it follow best practices?" — across all three GDD axes: systems, flows, and content types. Fans out adversarial lenses (completeness, clarity, pillar alignment, systems-math, fantasy-delivery, feasibility, scope) plus domain lenses that check it against the game-design rules, each prompted to find problems rather than validate; produces a severity-graded verdict and a two-bucket report (apply-ready fixes vs research), handed to /unikit-gd-apply or /unikit-gd-explore in one move. Scope is inferred: a named system, flow, or content type reviews that document; "all" runs a cross-document review. Use when the user wants a critique, quality judgment, or rules check of the design, e.g. "review the combat GDD", "review the onboarding flow". This is the subjective quality pass — for a mechanical consistency check (numbers, terms, IDs, references matching the registry) use /unikit-gd-verify.

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。

Pre-compaction housekeeping. Walks a checklist (persistent memory updates, git hygiene, trash cleanup) plus an open-judgment audit, produces an SBAR with a go/no-go recommendation, and emits a copy-pasteable resume prompt for the post-compaction agent if work remains. Run this immediately before /compact.

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。

Architectural review workflow. Analyzes codebase organization via noun analysis and produces a target blueprint. Advisory only — does not implement changes. Always offers to cut tickets for the planned work; orchestrators receive the proposal and apply their own autonomy judgment to approve / edit / decline.

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。

Mechanical documentation hygiene. Spawns a doc-maintainer agent to audit all project documentation and fix correctness, completeness, freshness, and consistency issues autonomously within its authority. Surfaces anything requiring user judgment for approval.

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。

Set an ECC-specific frontend design direction for production UI work. Use when building or improving websites, dashboards, applications, components, landing pages, visual tools, or any web UI that needs stronger product-specific design judgment.

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。

Remediation only — repair web accessibility (a11y) violations against WCAG 2.2 with a baseline, edit, and verify loop. Takes a target (URL, files, directory) or a findings worklist from `accessibility-scan`/`accessibility-inspect`/`accessibility-audit`, applies mechanical fixes as given, leaves TODOs for visual or contextual judgment, and verifies by re-running the baseline check. It only fixes. To find issues use `accessibility-scan` (one page, automated), `accessibility-inspect` (one page, manual), or `accessibility-audit` (whole site, WCAG-EM); to check for regressions use `accessibility-diff`. Use it for 'fix the a11y issues in X', 'make this accessible', 'add missing alt text and labels', 'apply these accessibility fixes', 'remediate these violations'.

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。

Drafts a verified U.S. appellate Bill of Costs itemizing taxable costs under FRAP 39 or state analogs. Trigger when the user needs to prepare, file, or tax appellate costs after judgment, or references FRAP 39, bill of costs on appeal, or appellate cost taxation.

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。

Drafts an itemized Bill of Costs on Appeal under FRAP 39 or state equivalent for the prevailing party to recover allowable appellate expenses. Triggers on appellate cost bill drafting, post-judgment cost recovery filings, or prevailing party cost submissions.

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。

辅助中国大陆行政机关法律工作人员，根据一段行政案情，按行政法基本原则进行价值判断、利益衡量，并形成倾向性裁量结论。

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。

Manages Rule 30(b)(6) corporate representative deposition workflows — drafting notice topics with reasonable particularity, building examination outlines, defending designees, handling objections, and preserving binding admissions for summary judgment or trial. Use when drafting or responding to 30(b)(6) notices, selecting and preparing designees, building topic-by-topic outlines, or triaging scope and privilege disputes. Trigger keywords: 30(b)(6), corporate representative deposition, topic list, designee, notice analysis, deposition objections, corporate admissions.

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 loading, listing, composing, or validating graded evaluation rubrics — PASS/WARN/FAIL grading with weighted criteria and balanced PASS/FAIL anchor examples. Triggers on /mk:rubric, "load rubric", "compose rubric preset", "validate rubric", or evaluator-style code review that needs anchor-grounded judgments.

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。

Diagnose when intuitive judgment, agent confidence, or expert routing can be trusted by classifying environment validity, feedback quality, and task-boundary fit. Use for confidence calibration, agent routing, expertise audits, and escalation design. NOT for deterministic implementation tasks, pure syntax debugging, or domains with explicit verifiable answers.

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。

Identify and counteract cognitive biases in medical decision-making through systematic error analysis and contextual algorithm application. For diagnostic reasoning, treatment decisions, and clinical judgment improvement. NOT for basic medical knowledge, technical procedures, or non-clinical healthcare domains.

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。