「compare」の検索結果

Deep, iterative, multi-source research that explores a topic from multiple perspectives, detects contradictions, and produces a comprehensive vault note with fact-level citations and a confidence map. Use this skill whenever the user says /deep-research, "deep research X", "research X thoroughly", "investigate X deeply", "I need to really understand X", or wants research that goes beyond a quick web search. Also use when the user wants to understand a complex, contested, or multi-faceted topic, compare competing approaches with evidence, or build a comprehensive mental model they can trust for decisions. This is heavier than /research — it searches web, academic papers, Reddit, and the vault, then loops through exploration and critique rounds until the evidence base is solid. When in doubt between /research and /deep-research, prefer this one if the topic is complex, contested, or the user wants depth over speed.

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, validates, packages, tests, and optimizes deployment-ready Skill files (SKILL.md + references/ + scripts/ + agents/) from design specifications. Three pre-build gates + 9-dimension quality gate (with D9a/b/c empirical evidence tiers) + behavioral iteration loop + automated description optimizer + blind version comparator. Use for building, reviewing, revising, testing, or optimizing Skills. Trigger on: "build this Skill," "review this Skill," "test my Skill," "optimize the description," "compare these Skill versions," "should this be a hook instead," "build a template first." Also: "my Skill doesn't activate," "my description truncates," "my SKILL.md is too long," "my Skill is overtriggering." Do NOT use when designing Skill methodology — that's design work, not packaging. Do NOT use for prompt compilation, project auditing, or prompt scoring (use rootnode-prompt-compilation, rootnode-project-audit, or rootnode-prompt-validation if available).

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。

Guides selection of identity, reasoning, and output approaches for Claude prompts based on task characteristics. Trigger on: "help me choose an approach," "which approach fits this task," "recommend a prompt pattern," "compare reasoning methods," "map this task to the right approach," "what combination of approaches," "which identity fits," "which reasoning method." Also trigger on symptom-phrased: "my prompt feels generic," "I don't know which approach to use," "my output lacks domain depth." Covers decision-tree logic across 8 identity approaches, 18 reasoning variants, and 10 output formats. After selection, use the relevant catalog skill if available to retrieve full templates. Activate whenever approach-selection across multiple categories is the primary decision. Do NOT use when the user already names a specific approach to retrieve (use the relevant catalog skill directly if available) or for evaluating existing prompts (use rootnode-prompt-validation if available).

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。

複数の実装アプローチを並列チームで設計・議論し、比較して最適な計画を選ぶスキル。 各アプローチに専門グループ（architect, critic, risk-analyst）が付き、グループ内で議論して計画を洗練する。 「どのアプローチがいいか比較したい」「複数の実装方法を検討したい」「計画を並べて比べたい」 「実装方針を複数出して」「アプローチを比較」「どっちがいいか調べて」と言われた時に使用。 実装タスクで迷いがある時、設計の選択肢が複数ある時にも積極的に使う。

Systematically interpret Raman spectra to identify molecular vibrations, assess polarizability-driven selection rules, compare with complementary IR data, and evaluate depolarization ratios for symmetry assignment. Covers Raman-active mode identification, fluorescence interference mitigation, and reference spectrum matching.

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。

Fit hidden Markov models using the Baum-Welch (EM) algorithm with model selection, Viterbi decoding for state sequences, and forward-backward probabilities. Use when observations are generated by unobservable latent states, you need to segment a time series into latent regimes (market regimes, speech phonemes, biological sequences), compute sequence probabilities, decode the most likely hidden state path, or compare models with different numbers of hidden states.

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。

Evaluate and compare levitation mechanisms for a given application through a structured trade study. Covers magnetic (passive diamagnetic, active feedback, superconducting), acoustic (standing wave, phased array), aerodynamic (hovercraft, air bearings, Coanda effect), and electrostatic (Coulomb suspension, ion traps) mechanisms. Use when selecting the most appropriate levitation approach for transport, sample handling, display, bearings, or precision measurement applications.

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 and repair Claude Code discovery symlinks for skills, agents, and teams. Compares registries against .claude/ directories at project and global levels, detects missing, broken, and extraneous symlinks, distinguishes almanac content from external projects, and optionally repairs gaps. Use after adding new skills or agents, after a repository rename or move, when slash commands stop working, 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。

Create consistent nn_cfd W&B experiment comparison reports from selected run IDs using wandb and wandb_workspaces. Use this whenever the user asks to report experiment results, create a W&B Report, compare CFD training/eval runs, document baseline-vs-variant outcomes, reproduce the project experiment report template, or publish a leaderboard-style report for milieu/nn_cfd.

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。

Estimate how likely a protein therapeutic is to provoke an anti-drug antibody response, and locate the sequence regions responsible. Use this skill to tile a sequence into peptides, predict class II MHC presentation across a population-representative allele panel, aggregate predicted binders into a per-region and whole-molecule risk score, compare a candidate against its closest human germline, and decide which liabilities are worth deimmunising. Also trigger on immunogenicity, anti-drug antibody, ADA, T-cell epitope, MHC class II, HLA-DRB1, NetMHCIIpan, NetMHCpan, deimmunisation, tregitope, or population coverage.

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。

Decide whether a protein has a pocket worth targeting, and where it is, before committing to a docking or design campaign. Use this skill to run fpocket cavity detection, rank cavities by druggability and volume, compare apo and holo conformations to spot induced fit, identify allosteric and cryptic cavities that only open in simulation, and convert a chosen cavity into the search box coordinates a docking run needs. Also trigger on fpocket, cavity detection, druggability score, alpha sphere, cryptic pocket, allosteric site, pocket volume, hotspot mapping, or undruggable target assessment.

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 US stock analysis including fundamental analysis (financial metrics, business quality, valuation), technical analysis (indicators, chart patterns, support/resistance), stock comparisons, and investment report generation. Use when user requests analysis of US stock tickers (e.g., "analyze AAPL", "compare TSLA vs NVDA", "give me a report on Microsoft"), evaluation of financial metrics, technical chart analysis, or investment recommendations for American stocks.

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 human asks to compare one closed or stale tracker issue with current reality and mark it done or update it. Don't use for bulk issue reconciliation or multi-issue sweeps.

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 throwaway HTML mockups so the user can compare design variants.

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。

Competitive pricing analysis — compares menu prices against local competitors, identifies underpriced items leaving money on the table and overpriced items hurting sales

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。

Score a PhD applicant's profile and rank candidate advisors using a connection-first 4.0-scale scoring system. Best-supported for physics / HEP and materials science (MSE), with the scoring engine extensible to chemistry, biology, CS, math, EE, ChemE, earth science (each with field-specific caveats — see references/journal_tiers.md). Use when the user wants to evaluate their PhD application chances, find matching advisors at top US programs, score a CV for graduate school, or compare candidate professors. Also triggers when the user mentions phdtaketaketake or its connection-first philosophy of valuing advisor network over h-index.

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。

Compile, profile, diagnose, optimize, and compare Ascend NPU operators across CANN versions and A2/A3/A5 for Ascend C, CATLASS, Triton-Ascend, TileLang-Ascend, PyPTO, and SHMEM/MC2. Use when an operator already has a runnable implementation and the user asks for msOpProf collection, bottleneck analysis, source-level tuning, or a reproducible before/after performance report. Do not use as the primary workflow for operator creation, migration, or unresolved correctness failures.

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。

Creates high-converting 'X vs Y' and 'X alternatives' SEO pages that capture comparison search traffic. Researches competitors, writes honest comparison content, and adds schema markup (FAQPage, ItemList). Use when someone needs alternatives pages, comparison content, or says 'alternatives page', 'vs page', 'comparison', 'competitor alternatives', 'X vs Y page', or wants to capture competitor brand search traffic with SEO content. Also trigger when someone wants to rank for competitor brand names, capture competitor search traffic, create a compare page, or build a competitive content hub. Even if they just say 'how do we compete with X' or 'we need to show up when people search for [competitor]', this skill applies. Owns the individual alternatives / vs / comparison page. For a batch roadmap of many pages with a phase tracker, see /seo-machine. For programmatic SEO and templated content at scale, see /seo-content.

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。

Head-to-Head Candidate Comparison — two candidates side-by-side across skills, experience, culture fit, salary expectations, references, hire-or-no-hire recommendation

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。

제안서 디자인 에이전트. 승인된 proposal_script.md를 generate_제안서.py Python 코드로 변환합니다. slide_kit.py 함수 시그니처, VStack 레이아웃 계산, 7대 디자인 패턴, 겹침/넘침 방지, Dark-Light Rhythm을 적용합니다. 트리거: 디자인, 코드 생성, 레이아웃, VStack, slide_kit, 겹침, 넘침, COLS, GRID, FLOW, CHART, TABLE, HIGHLIGHT, KPIS, COMPARE, TIMELINE, PYRAMID, MATRIX, 그림자, 카드, Hero, Bento, Comparison

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。

See the difference between Chat and Cowork with a live side-by-side comparison for understanding why Cowork is built differently. Use when evaluating AI tools, for comparing chat versus agent capabilities, during an AI tool decision, when switching from ChatGPT or Claude Chat, or when the user says "what is different about cowork", "cowork vs chat", "why not just use chatgpt", "show me the difference", "compare chat and cowork", or "why should I use cowork instead of chat".

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。

Roast the current repo's design system with real data. Runs a deterministic scanner (no tokens, ~1s) that counts everything that betrays a design system, from colours and their near-identical twins to greys, spacing values, typefaces, duplicated and never-imported components, inline styles, !important and arbitrary Tailwind values, and compares them against Ideal Design System norms, a benchmark of 119 public repos (a 34-repo core fleet plus groups for shadcn, Tailwind, MUI, Mantine, Chakra, Ant Design and web components) and 10 reputable design systems, generates a shareable HTML diagnosis, and can generate design-system-rules.md, the agent rules file that stops the mess regrowing.

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。

Detect and remove the tells of AI-generated writing in BOTH English and Spanish, and read back the evidence honestly. Use when the user asks to "de-AI" / "humanize" / "un-slop" a draft, to examine whether text carries the tells (delve, tapestry, "it's not just X, it's Y", "here's the thing", em-dash overuse, an assistant's own closing line left in the document), to compare documents for overlap, or mentions signs-of-ai / SignsOfAI. Backed by the SignsOfAI engine — for a measured 0–100 score, sentence-rhythm burstiness, originality, citations, a writer baseline or perplexity, hand off to that engine (web app, CLI or MCP server) as described below. It cannot determine who wrote a text and must never imply that it can.

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 pull request or contribution deeply, explain it tutorial-style for a maintainer, and produce a polished report artifact such as HTML or Markdown. Use when asked to analyze a PR, explain a contributor's design decisions, compare it with similar systems, or prepare a merge recommendation.

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。