「evidence」の検索結果

Adversarial verification of finished work. Treats any "done" as a set of claims, then re-runs the claimed verifications, diffs what actually changed, detects weakened tests and false completion claims, and delivers an evidence-based verdict (VERIFIED / VERIFIED WITH CAVEATS / REFUTED). Use after any agent or model claims work is complete - "/fable-judge", "judge this work", "verify what it did", "did that actually work?". Also runs the fable-method trap suite against a skill or model via "/fable-judge suite TARGET".

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。

End-to-end orchestrated workflow that runs a task the way Fable ran sessions - parallel evidence subagents, one committed plan, surgical execution with an intent gate, adversarial verification agents, honest outcome-first report. Use for non-trivial multi-step tasks when the user says "/fable-loop", "run the fable loop", or "do this the way Fable would". For the rules alone without orchestration, use fable-method; for large multi-phase projects, prefer the GSD workflow and use this inside phases.

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 receiving code review feedback (especially if unclear or technically questionable), when completing tasks or major features requiring review before proceeding, or before making any completion/success claims. Covers three practices - receiving feedback with technical rigor over performative agreement, requesting reviews via code-reviewer subagent, and verification gates requiring evidence before any status claims. Essential for subagent-driven development, pull requests, and preventing false completion claims.

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 and use a persistent, citation-traceable knowledge wiki from documents, research papers, notes, or project documentation. Use for llmwiki projects, retrieving reusable evidence for an agent task, or compiling a corpus for repeated questions. A one-off file read or live web search does not need a wiki.

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 Ni Haisha / 倪海厦 TCM course material, especially Shang Han Lun / 伤寒论, Jingui / 金匮要略, Zhongjing Xinfa / 仲景心法, clinical cases / 临床案例 / 倪师医案, Bagang Bianzheng / 八纲辨证, Fuyang Forum / 扶阳论坛, Yijinjing / 易筋经, Liang Dong dialogue / 梁冬对话倪师, Stanford lecture / 斯坦福大学演讲, Tianji / 天纪 / 易经 / 阳宅 / 紫微斗数, Huangdi Neijing / 黄帝内经, Shennong Bencao / 神农本草, acupuncture / 针灸, meridians, acupoints, acupuncture depth safety / 危险进针深度 / 气胸风险, six-channel pattern identification, symptom-to-formula routing, formula comparison, lesson review, board/PPT screenshot evidence, or course-derived study notes. This skill is for educational distillation and study support only, not medical diagnosis, prescriptions, dosage, individualized treatment, or self-administered acupuncture.

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。

Plan and collect OpenClaw Windows validation/proof: tests, rubber-duck review, UI evidence, MCP output, and gateway runtime proof.

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。

Improve the clarity and voice of AI-assisted academic writing (papers, theses, rebuttals) and funding proposals (NSF Project Summary/Description, NIH Specific Aims): preserve scholarly conventions, match claims to evidence (and, for proposals, claims to feasibility), and match the author's own voice. It never changes a number, result, or citation, and it is not for evading AI-use disclosure. Use when editing AI-assisted academic prose or grant proposals.

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 questions and assessments that measure what they claim — matching item type to the thing being assessed, writing distractors that diagnose, and telling a question that measures learning from one that measures reading speed or test-taking. Use this to write or review assessment items, design a unit check or diagnostic, work out why scores do not match classroom performance, or decide how much evidence a claim about mastery actually needs.

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。

Decides where capital and attention go across business lines, products, and markets — what to fund, hold, harvest, or exit, and on what evidence. Use this to allocate budget across businesses, evaluate whether a product line should continue, decide whether to exit one, structure a portfolio review, or when several initiatives compete for the same limited investment.

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。

Designs and tests controls over financial reporting — segregation of duties, approval limits, evidence, and preparing for audit. Use this to design controls for a process, prepare for an external audit, respond to an audit finding, set approval thresholds, or assess where a small team's segregation of duties is genuinely broken.

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 for 'why does X work this way', 'why we picked Y', design rationale, regressions, postmortems, or data-backed thresholds. Discovers available MCPs and queries each evidence category (source control, issue tracker, long-form docs, real-time chat, infrastructure observability, error tracking, product analytics warehouse) in parallel, then returns a cited read on decisions and tradeoffs. Use how for runtime behavior.

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。

Keep a reviewable decision trail for long-running or unattended work: a TSV log with one row per decision (what, why, evidence, result). Local by default; commit it when a reviewer needs the trail to trust the result. Use for /show-me-your-work, autonomous or multi-phase runs, or work a human reviews after stepping away.

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 for "automate me", "create/update/refresh my -mode skill", "turn/capture my preferences or working style into a skill", or wanting agents to follow how the user works. Drafts or revises a personal -mode skill via plugin-dev:skill-development + unslop, optionally pulling fresh evidence from recent transcripts.

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 about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always

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 professional clinical decision support (CDS) documents for pharmaceutical and clinical research settings, including patient cohort analyses (biomarker-stratified with outcomes) and treatment recommendation reports (evidence-based guidelines with decision algorithms). ...

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。

Designs retrospective or prospective clinical cohort study protocols for biomedical and clinical research. Always use this skill when the user needs a cohort-based study plan rather than a general study idea, evidence summary, or mechanistic experiment design. Focus on cohort appropriateness, enrollment logic, baseline time-zero definition, follow-up structure, endpoint definition, variable collection, confounding control, and a coherent primary statistical analysis line. Do not invent data availability, follow-up completeness, outcome ascertainment quality, sample size adequacy, or causal interpretability.

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。

Designs QTL colocalization studies that connect eQTL, pQTL, sQTL, or related molecular QTL signals with GWAS loci. Always use this skill whenever a user wants to plan, scope, or structure a locus-level study asking whether a GWAS association and a molecular QTL association may reflect the same underlying causal signal. Covers locus definition, QTL/GWAS source architecture, ancestry and LD alignment, single-locus vs multi-locus strategy, candidate-gene prioritization, optional fine-mapping, linked MR/SMR follow-up, and functional annotation. Always output four workload configurations (Lite / Standard / Advanced / Publication+) with a recommended primary plan, stepwise workflow, method rationale, evidence hierarchy, figure plan, minimal executable version, and strictly verified literature guidance with no fabricated references. Never equate colocalization with causality proof, mediation proof, or automatic target validation. Always include the mandatory Dataset Disclaimer immediately before any workflow section that mentions datasets, repositories, consortia, or public resources.

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。

Generates complete two-sample Mendelian randomization research designs from a user-provided outcome, exposure or exposure family, and robustness direction. Use when a study centers on summary-statistics causal inference with instrument selection, harmonization, IVW-primary estimation, complementary estimators, sensitivity analyses, optional multivariable upgrades, and conservative evidence interpretation. Covers five study patterns and always outputs Lite / Standard / Advanced / Publication+ with a recommended primary plan, stepwise workflow, figure plan, validation hierarchy, minimal executable version, publication upgrade path, and strictly verified literature retrieval.

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。

Generates submission-ready Elsevier/SCI Highlights from manuscript text or extracted PDF/DOCX/TXT content. Use when a user needs 3-5 concise, evidence-grounded highlight bullets for a research paper, review, meta-analysis, case report, or bioinformatics manuscript.

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。

Evidence-based medical knowledge and research mentor grounded in the Bian Que tradition. Covers clinical reasoning, diagnostic thinking (望闻问切), pharmacology, pathology, differential diagnosis, medical literature appraisal, and the philosophy of early intervention. Trigger whenever users ask about medicine, clinical science, drugs, disease mechanisms, diagnosis, lab interpretation, treatment comparison, or health sciences. Even without explicit research framing, trigger on any topic touching disease, therapeutics, or clinical decision-making. Part of the AIPOCH Medical Research Skill Hub.

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。

Generates complete FAERS pharmacovigilance study designs for multi-drug or class-level safety comparison inside one predefined SOC or AE family using active comparators, disproportionality analysis, subgroup characterization, and reviewer-facing evidence control.

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。

Finds translational opportunities that connect basic-research discoveries to clinically meaningful use cases such as diagnosis, stratification, prognosis, treatment response prediction, monitoring, or therapeutic development. Use this skill when a user wants to turn a mechanism finding, pathway signal, cellular phenotype, experimental observation, or omics discovery into a stronger translational research direction. Always separate mechanistic relevance from translational usability, and never present a basic finding as clinically actionable unless the evidence supports that level.

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 bioinformatics data analysis skill to construct a database-driven lncRNA-mRNA regulatory network from target lncRNA and/or gene lists by projecting shared miRNA evidence from local ceRNA reference tables. It does not infer networks from expression matrices.

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。

A medical-research-native literature reading skill for users with clinical, bioinformatics, translational, and basic experimental backgrounds. Use this skill whenever a user wants to read, analyze, critique, or interpret a medical or scientific paper — whether they provide a PDF, abstract, DOI, PMID, or just a title. Triggers include requests like \"analyze this paper\", \"critique this study\", \"is this a strong paper?\", \"give me similar studies\", \"prepare me for journal club\", \"help me understand this bioinformatics paper\", \"what are the weaknesses here?\", or \"turn this into a mind map\". Also activate for any downstream deliverables such as journal club kits, comparison tables, PI decision briefs, replication starters, or follow-up experiment designs. Do NOT treat as a generic summarizer — this skill performs structured evidence-type classification, track-specific critical appraisal, interpretation-boundary judgment, and research-grade follow-up 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。