「question」の検索結果

Analyze KiCad projects and PDF schematics: schematics, PCB layouts, Gerbers, footprints, symbols, netlists, and design rules. Reviews designs for bugs, traces nets, cross-references schematic to PCB, extracts BOM data, checks DRC/ERC, DFM, power trees, and regulator circuits. Every finding carries a confidence label and evidence source with trust_summary rollup. Analyzes PDF schematics from dev boards, reference designs, eval kits, and datasheets. Supports KiCad 5–10. Use whenever the user mentions .kicad_sch, .kicad_pcb, .kicad_pro, PCB design review, schematic analysis, PDF schematics, reference designs, Gerber files, DRC/ERC, netlist issues, BOM extraction, signal tracing, power budget, DFM, or wants to understand, debug, compare, or review any hardware design. Also for "check my board", "review before fab", "what's wrong with my schematic", "is this ready to order", "check my power supply", "verify this circuit", OSHWA certification readiness, or any electronics/PCB design question.

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。

Deep strategic research engine — decomposes questions into parallel research threads, spawns multiple agents, and synthesizes into actionable strategic analysis

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 generated or changed production code before it ships, using Clean Code, SOLID, DRY, KISS, YAGNI, and LLM-specific failure-mode checks in any programming language. Best used reactively after an agent writes, edits, refactors, or fixes code, before presenting, committing, or merging the result. Use when the user asks "review this PR", "is this safe to merge?", "make this cleaner", "audit this code", "refactor this", "fix this bug", or after a coding agent produced implementation code. Can also guide writing when explicitly invoked before a risky edit. Invoke it on your own initiative the moment you finish writing, editing, or refactoring non-trivial production code, before presenting or committing — don't wait to be asked. DO NOT USE for factual/conceptual questions, CI/tooling config, git workflow, running/debugging tests, pure architecture discussion, prose writing, data analysis, or test-code review (use test-guard).

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 generated or changed WordPress code — plugins, themes, and blocks — before it ships. Best used reactively after an agent writes, edits, or reviews code touching WordPress APIs: add_action/add_filter, shortcodes, meta boxes, AJAX handlers, REST routes, WP_Query or $wpdb, widgets, or WP-CLI commands. Use on 'review this plugin', 'is this safe to ship', 'make this translatable', 'speed up this query', or after tasks like 'write a plugin' or 'add an endpoint/shortcode/meta box'. Enforces escaping and sanitization, nonces plus capability checks, prepared database queries, core-API-first development, translation-ready strings, and query/caching discipline. DO NOT USE for WooCommerce-specific order, product, or checkout logic (use woo-guard), non-WordPress PHP, generic code quality review (use clean-code-guard), test code review (use test-guard), server or hosting configuration, or conceptual WordPress questions.

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 generated or changed WooCommerce code — extensions, payment and shipping integrations, checkout customizations, and order/product logic — before it ships. Best used reactively after an agent writes, edits, or reviews code touching WooCommerce APIs: wc_get_order, wc_get_orders, wc_get_product, WC() cart or session, woocommerce_* hooks, Store API endpoints, payment gateways, order or product meta, HPOS, subscriptions, or bookings. Use on 'review this Woo plugin', 'is this HPOS compatible', or after tasks like 'write a WooCommerce extension', 'add a checkout field', 'hook into the order flow', or 'update stock'. Enforces HPOS-safe order access, CRUD over direct meta, feature-compatibility declarations, server-side checkout validation, money-handling discipline, and hooks over template overrides. DO NOT USE for WordPress code without WooCommerce APIs (use wp-guard), generic code review (use clean-code-guard), test review (use test-guard), or store configuration and admin-screen questions.

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 deciding whether an anthropology project fits American Anthropologist (AA) and which section to target. AA is the four-field AAA flagship, so the test is significance across anthropology (sociocultural, archaeology, biological, linguistic), not single-subfield novelty. Helps frame the question and pick a section; it does not collect data or conduct fieldwork.

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 the question is what makes the result tight or what the data identify for an American Economic Journal: Microeconomics (AEJ: Micro) manuscript — covering both (a) structural/empirical-IO and experimental identification and (b) for pure theory, which assumptions drive the result and how robust the mechanism is. Stress-tests credibility; it does not build the model (see aejmic-theory-model).

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 as the entry point for any Agricultural Systems (AgSy) manuscript. Routes to the right AgSy sub-skill based on where you are in the lifecycle and which article type (research paper, short communication, perspective, comment, review) fits. AgSy is a systems-science journal, so the router's first job is to confirm there is a real systems question — interactions, hierarchical levels, trade-offs — not a single-factor field trial. It dispatches; it does not draft 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。

Use when drafting an ACM CCS rebuttal during the HotCRP author-response window, covering threat-model defenses, adaptive-attack objections, ethics and disclosure questions, anonymity constraints, adversarial reviewer pushback patterns, and decision-focused replies aimed at the meta-reviewer.

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 scoping or sanity-checking a research question for an Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) manuscript — fit, theory-drivenness, and feasibility. Decides whether the idea can earn a theoretical contribution; it does not build the theory itself (use amj-theory-development) or position the literature (amj-literature-positioning).

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 the research design and method are the bottleneck for an Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) manuscript — matching design (archival, survey, experiment, multi-method, field) and level of analysis to the theoretical question. Designs the study; it does not run the estimation or validity checks (amj-data-analysis).

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。

Orchestrator that runs first for lead generation requests. Gathers business context via website analysis or questions, identifies competitors, builds ICP, and routes to signal skills with pre-filled inputs.

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。

Discover rising category conversations, formats, sounds, questions, and creator patterns across social platforms, then separate durable demand signals from short-lived noise.

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。

Produce a decision-ready brief of current brand, product, category, and competitor conversations across social platforms, including sentiment drivers, questions, risks, and growth opportunities.

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。

Mine comments and replies on social posts, videos, and ads for recurring customer language, questions, objections, desired outcomes, complaints, product requests, purchase signals, and creative opportunities. Use for voice-of-customer research grounded in linked source evidence.

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。

Fetch and read transcripts from YouTube videos. Use when you need to summarize a video, answer questions about its content, or extract information from 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。

Email campaign/sequence performance review composite. Pulls campaign data (sends, opens, replies, bounces), reads actual email copy and subject lines, analyzes reply content (objections, positive interest, questions), and produces a diagnostic report covering quantitative metrics, copy quality, lead quality, and actionable recommendations. Tool-agnostic — works with Smartlead (MCP), Instantly, Outreach, Lemlist, Apollo, or CSV data.

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。

Lead qualification engine with conversational intake. Asks structured questions to understand your qualification criteria, generates a reusable qualification prompt, then batch-enriches leads via Apify LinkedIn scraping and scores them with parallel processing. Outputs qualified/disqualified verdicts with confidence scores and reasoning to CSV or whatever output format the user prefers. Supports calibration mode for prompt refinement.

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。

Find warm leads by searching LinkedIn for pain-language posts — the frustrations, complaints, and operational struggles your ICP talks about publicly. Asks clarifying questions to understand your product, ICP, and their pain points, then generates pain-language search keywords, scrapes LinkedIn for posts and engagers, enriches profiles, and ICP-filters the results. Use when someone wants to "find leads who are complaining about X" or "find people discussing problems we solve" or "LinkedIn pain-based prospecting."

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。

The intake stage of a Meta ad harness. Researches the brand first, states what it assumes, and asks only what it cannot infer and what would change money, claims or legal exposure if guessed wrong — at most four questions a turn, in plain business language. Writes the brand's stable facts (ads/brand.md), the campaign brief, and a log of what was asked vs assumed. Use it when someone wants to run Meta ads and the brand's ad facts are not yet recorded.

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。

Research a specific competitor across their website, reviews, ads, social presence, and pricing — then produce a structured sales battlecard with positioning traps, objection handlers, landmine questions, and win/loss themes. Chains web research, review mining, and ad intelligence. Use when sales needs competitive ammo or when entering a new market with established incumbents.

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。

Estimates Fabric capacity cost before a migration by profiling Spark, SQL, Power BI, and Real-Time workloads, then recommending SKU size and comparing Reserved, Pay-As-You-Go, and Autoscale billing. Use only for capacity sizing and pricing questions, not for general migration or connectivity 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。

Plans and builds end-to-end Fabric data platforms on the Bronze, Silver, and Gold medallion pattern: ingestion to analytics, PySpark and Delta layers, pipeline orchestration, per-layer Spark tuning, Materialized Lake View versus notebook choices for Silver and Gold, and Direct Lake handoff. Use for layered architecture design, planning and recommendations. For questions over an existing Power BI report use fabriciq.

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 Fabric IQ Ontology items, including entity and relationship types, data bindings, and definition updates, plus schema, lineage, grounding, and graph-walk exploration. Use for ontology modelling and traversal. For natural-language questions over a Power BI report use fabriciq.

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。