862 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Behavioral guidelines to reduce common LLM coding mistakes. Use when writing, reviewing, or refactoring code to avoid overcomplication, make surgical changes, surface assumptions, and define verifiable success criteria.
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 an unbuilt business idea on desirability, viability, feasibility, distribution wedge, why-now, founder-market-fit, market size, alternatives, defensibility, capital intensity, and regulatory/ethical risk — and return a GO / ITERATE / KILL verdict with kill criteria and a next kill test. Load when the user asks to evaluate a business idea, score a startup idea, screen an idea, decide whether to pursue this venture, do an idea review, or says "is this a good business idea", "should I build this", "evaluate this startup", "screen this idea", "go/no-go on this idea", "kill or pursue". Sub-skill of `venture-exploration`. Calls `fermi` for sizing, `assumption-mapping` for hidden beliefs, optional `pre-mortem` / `adversarial-hat` for high-stakes ideas. Does NOT evaluate built products — for that use `reality-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。
Run a structured discovery interview and produce a complete, developer-ready Product Requirements Document. Load when the user asks to write a PRD, create product requirements, document a feature, define user stories with acceptance criteria, or turn a rough idea into a formal product requirements document. Also triggers on "document this feature", "write requirements for", "create a one-pager", "turn this into a PRD", "I need a PRD for", or any request to produce a structured product document for stakeholder alignment or engineering handoff. Supports Full PRD, Lean PRD, and One-Pager formats. Note: for executable feature specifications (FRs, NFRs, ACs as Given/When/Then consumable by AI coding agents), route to `feature-spec` instead — PRDs frame the product, feature-specs encode the implementable contract.
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。
Write the executable feature specification — the WHAT and WHY artifact that agents and reviewers treat as source of truth. Owns both /specify and /clarify modes. Load when the user asks to write a feature spec, write a specification, write an executable spec, define functional requirements, capture acceptance criteria as Given/When/Then, or when the spec-driven-development orchestrator routes here. Also triggers on "feature spec", "executable spec", "/specify", "/clarify", "write the spec for this feature", "specification for", "spec-driven", "machine-readable spec". Output: docs/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<slug>-feature-spec.md. Hard gate: cannot Approve while [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain.
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 structured retrospective after development-phase runs of your product's agents — interview the owner in plain language about what went well and poorly, draft ranked improvement hypotheses, then design and run small n=1/n=2 experiments with pre-declared success criteria, guardrails, stop conditions, and a cost/ROI kill-switch. Load when the user says how did that run go, retro this run, the agent output was bad, what should we improve, draft hypotheses, run a small experiment, or after repeated dev runs of an agentic system produce uneven quality. Priority: output quality over performance over cost, each with diminishing-returns stops. NOT a product A/B test (experimentation), NOT coding-agent harness repair (harness-evolution), NOT production-scale learning (runtime-learning-loop).
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。
Select colormaps and qualitative palettes for scientific figures using perceptual-uniformity, color-vision-deficiency safety, and luminance-monotonicity criteria. Covers Crameri scientific colormaps, viridis/cividis/magma, Okabe-Ito categorical, ColorBrewer, and the rainbow/jet critique. Use when choosing palettes for heatmaps, scatter, networks, or any encoding where color carries quantitative or categorical meaning.
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。
Classify constitutional (germline) copy number variants for clinical reporting using the 2019 ACMG/ClinGen technical standards points-based framework, with ClassifyCNV and AnnotSV for semi-automated scoring. Covers the separate copy-number-loss and copy-number-gain rubrics, the five-tier classification, ClinGen haploinsufficiency/triplosensitivity and dosage-sensitive regions, de novo and segregation evidence, and population-frequency benign evidence. Use when assigning pathogenic/likely-pathogenic/VUS/likely-benign/benign to a constitutional CNV, scoring a CNV against ACMG/ClinGen criteria, or distinguishing the automatable evidence from the case-specific evidence requiring manual input.
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。
ATAC-seq library quality control -- TSS enrichment, FRiP, fragment-size periodicity, library complexity (NRF/PBC1/PBC2), mitochondrial fraction, and ENCODE 4 thresholds. Use when assessing whether an ATAC-seq library passes ENCODE acceptance criteria, diagnosing transposition artefacts, comparing Omni-ATAC vs standard prep quality, or selecting which replicates to drop before peak calling.
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 this skill when the user asks about CMV vehicle inspections under 49 CFR 396 — DVIRs (Driver Vehicle Inspection Reports), pre-trip inspections, post-trip inspections, periodic inspections, annual inspections, who can perform inspections, OOS criteria, and what makes a "no defect" DVIR valid. Cite 49 CFR 396.
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 this skill when selecting a TPR-registered Training Provider for behind-the-wheel ELDT training. Covers the registry, evaluation criteria, and common pitfalls.
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 this skill when the user asks about weigh-station bypass services — Drivewyze, PrePass, BestPass, NORPASS, OOIDA toll savings — how they work, eligibility criteria, costs, and how they tie into CSA scores. Reference each provider's coverage area + pricing.
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 carrier asks about tire program design, when to retread vs replace, position management (steer vs drive vs trailer), inflation pressure standards, casing management, scrub rates, road-call prevention, or vendor program selection (Bridgestone, Michelin, Continental, Goodyear). Covers 49 CFR 393.75 and DOT roadside out-of-service criteria.
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 this skill when a driver encounters adverse weather, road, or traffic conditions and needs to extend driving time. Covers eligibility criteria, the 2-hour maximum extension, documentation requirements, and what does NOT qualify.
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 this skill when selecting or replacing an ELD provider. Covers the FMCSA Registered ELD list, evaluation criteria, common provider removals from the registered list, and the 60-day transition rule.
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 this skill when selecting an MRO for drug testing program oversight. Covers MRO qualifications under Part 40, what the MRO does, and how to evaluate MRO services.
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 this skill when a crash has been incorrectly classified as DOT-recordable when it shouldn't be. Covers the § 390.5 criteria, common misclassifications, and challenge process.
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 this skill to maintain a tiedown inspection schedule. Covers when to inspect, what to look for, replacement criteria.
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 this skill when the user asks about cargo securement requirements under 49 CFR 393 Subpart I — Working Load Limit (WLL), tiedown counts, tiedown types, commodity-specific securement rules (lumber, metal coils, paper rolls, concrete pipe, intermodal containers, vehicles, large boulders, dressed lumber, building materials), CVSA out-of-service criteria, and how to calculate aggregate WLL. Cite 49 CFR 393.100-136.
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 after implementing features - verifies each acceptance criterion with structured testing and posts verification reports to the GitHub issue
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。
受け入れ基準書を作成する。検収基準、完了条件の定義時に使う。
Documentation QA knowledge base. Provides quality checklists, audit criteria, and metrics for documentation 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。
将抽象的Acceptance Criteria（Given-When-Then）转换为具体的数值示例和真实对话，让AC对PM/客户/测试人员更易懂。适合在AC编写完成后、准备测试或向客户展示时使用，当AC格式正确但过于抽象时。帮助不熟悉BDD的PM/BA/测试人员理解测试场景，让AC从抽象规则变成可直接用于手动测试的具体步骤。
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。
Turn vague Acceptance Criteria into measurable checks and test assertions
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。
[40] PLAN. Create clear action plans with steps, success criteria, and risk awareness. Use before implementing features, making changes, starting projects, or anytime you need a roadmap to success. Triggers on "plan this", "how should we approach", "what's the strategy", "steps to complete", or when facing complex multi-step work.
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。