「can」の検索結果

cheat-on-skill 的核心。连 BOSS 直聘真实招聘数据 + 网页信号，按用户能力画像找「高薪 × 你学得动 × AI 增强」交集里的候选岗位。每个岗位给：薪资量级 / 需求热度 / 你的差距 / 可学性分 / 诚实学习周期，并过 AI 影响分类与反诈红线。触发词："帮我找岗位"/"找AI时代高薪工作"/"有什么我能学的高薪岗"/"skill scan"/"扫一遍招聘"。前置：需要 .skill-state.json（无则先路由到 skill-init）。

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 devopsdays event that is already listed on the site has to be cancelled or postponed, and its pages need to stop advertising dates, registration, and sponsorship.

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 an interactive bash wizard that walks a human through steps only they can perform. Use when provisioning infrastructure, setting up credentials or CI secrets, walking an unfamiliar third-party dashboard, or running a one-off migration or cutover. Don't invoke this for steps the agent can perform itself.

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。

Implement consumer-driven contract testing with Pact-JS (v16). Covers consumer test writing, broker-driven provider verification, Pact Broker setup, can-i-deploy as a deployment gate, webhook-triggered verification, pending pacts, and schema-first vs consumer-first approaches (OpenAPI/Ajv, Schemathesis). Use when: "contract test," "Pact," "consumer-driven," "API contract," "provider verification," "can-i-deploy." Not for: stubbing or mocking a dependency to isolate a test — use service-virtualization; general REST/GraphQL endpoint assertions against your own API — use api-testing. Related: api-testing, service-virtualization, ci-cd-integration, test-environments.

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。

Safe-release techniques DURING rollout: feature flags, progressive rollouts, canary analysis, guardrail metrics, production smoke tests, and synthetic users. Bridges QA and SRE practices. Use when: "feature flag testing," "canary deploy," "progressive rollout," "guardrail metrics," "dark launch," "safe rollout." Not for: scheduled probes that run continuously after release — use `synthetic-monitoring`. Not for: designing tests from prod telemetry — use `observability-driven-testing`. Related: release-readiness, synthetic-monitoring, observability-driven-testing, qa-metrics.

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。

Validate release readiness with evidence-based go/no-go decisions. Covers go/no-go checklists, smoke test suite design, staged rollout validation, rollback criteria and procedures, and post-deployment verification. Ensures release confidence comes from data, not feelings. Use when: "release ready," "go/no-go," "smoke test," "release checklist," "rollback plan," "staged rollout," "canary deploy." Not for: safe-release techniques (flags, canary, dark launch) applied during the rollout itself — use testing-in-production; scheduled probes that run continuously after release — use synthetic-monitoring; designing new tests from prod telemetry — use observability-driven-testing. Related: testing-in-production, qa-metrics, ci-cd-integration, ai-system-testing.

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。

Implement features and fix bugs test-first, the Canon TDD way (test list → one test → make it pass → refactor → repeat). Use when implementing any new feature, endpoint, model, or method, fixing a bug, or executing a plan — write the test list and a failing test BEFORE production code.

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。

Implement the current plan test-first, the Canon TDD way, driving to a single finishing condition — an empty test list. Derives a Canon TDD test list from the plan, shows it before any code, writes one failing test at a time, and keeps the list visible as it evolves. Use when the user asks to implement, build, or execute the current/approved plan.

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。

Expert guidance for Checkov, the static analysis tool for infrastructure-as-code that scans Terraform, CloudFormation, Kubernetes, Helm, Dockerfile, and ARM templates for security misconfigurations and compliance violations. Helps developers integrate Checkov into CI/CD pipelines and write custom policies.

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 a founder from real decisions to a short set of written company values that people can act on: collects incidents, tests each candidate value, writes it as a trade-off with behaviors and a story, and wires it into hiring, feedback and promotion. Use when someone asks to "define our company values", "write a values document", "our values are generic, fix them", "turn our values into interview questions", "what should our culture be before we hire", or wants to check whether the team lives the values it has. Produces VALUES.md, an evidence log and an interview kit.

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/B and multivariate testing methodology. Design experiments, calculate sample sizes, determine statistical significance, avoid common pitfalls, and interpret results. Platform-agnostic framework applicable to landing pages, emails, ads, pricing, and product features. Use when the user asks about A/B testing, split testing, experiment design, statistical significance, or conversion experiments.

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。

Firebase gives you a complete backend in minutes - auth, database, storage, functions, hosting. But the ease of setup hides real complexity. Security rules are your last line of defense, and they're often wrong. Firestore queries are limited, and you learn this after you've designed your data model. This skill covers Firebase Authentication, Firestore, Realtime Database, Cloud Functions, Cloud Storage, and Firebase Hosting. Key insight: Firebase is optimized for read-heavy, denormalized data. If you're thinking relationally, you're thinking wrong. 2025 lesson: Firestore pricing can surprise you. Reads are cheap until they're not. A poorly designed listener can cost more than a dedicated database. Plan your data model for your query patterns, not your data relationships. Use when "firebase, firestore, firebase auth, cloud functions, firebase storage, realtime database, firebase hosting, firebase emulator, security rules, firebase admin, firebase, firestore, cloud-functions, serverless, backend, realtime, authentication, google-cloud" mentioned.

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。

Expert in business model design - the architecture of how a company creates, delivers, and captures value. Covers business model canvas, revenue model selection, value chain design, and business model innovation. Knows when to copy proven models and when to innovate. Use when "business model, revenue model, how to monetize, unit economics, value proposition, business model canvas, business model innovation, " mentioned.

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。

De-slop pass for any text. Scans for the statistical fingerprints of AI writing (negative parallelism / "not X but Y", em-dash density, rule-of-three, false ranges, puffery vocabulary, uniform cadence, hedged both-sidesing), rewrites by meaning, then re-scans until the text is clean and sits in the right register for its genre: academic article, tweet, reddit post, email, blog, docs, marketing. Use when the user says "deslopify", "deslop", "de-slop this", "remove the AI tells", "humanize this", "make this not sound like AI", or invokes /deslopify. Also use before publishing any agent-drafted prose.

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。

Challenges a recommendation, design, large change, or any artifact submitted for hard review (spec, proposal, policy, plan) across 5 dimensions (consistency, completeness, actionability, alignment, risk), from the standards of a named senior expert in the artifact's domain and ideally from a fresh context or a different model. Searches assuming defects exist and reports only those that survive evidence. Panel mode runs several independent lenses in parallel on a release candidate, verifies every finding against the current head, and routes confirmed ones to file owners. Use before shipping a significant recommendation, design, large branch, or multi-agent release, or when asked to tear something apart, be brutally honest, or poke holes in 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。

Audit whether a paper's EVALUATION DESIGN actually measures what it claims and whether its reporting is complete — the validity layer family D (experiment-forensics) cannot reach. Three patterns: train/test leakage means the reported score may not measure generalization (HP-EVAL-LEAKAGE — adopts the Kapoor & Narayanan 8-type / 3-category leakage taxonomy; the illegitimate-proxy / sampling-bias / pretraining-contamination subtypes hand off as needs_external_check, naming but NEVER running Oren-2023 exchangeability / Shi-2023 Min-K% / Golchin-2023 Time-Travel / BIG-bench canary); a load-bearing LLM judge is conflicted (same model/family as a compared system) or unvalidated (no human-agreement, no bias control) (HP-JUDGE-VALIDITY); a declared condition/metric is dropped or switched to favor the method, or 'best' is chosen with no held-out set (HP-SELECTIVE-REPORTING). Verdict-bearing at L0/L1 from the DESCRIBED protocol — NOT repo-gated like experiment-forensics; L2 only CONFIRMS against split/preprocessing/result files. A fresh cross-model reviewer (gpt-5.6-sol xhigh, read-only, fresh thread per pass) PROPOSES findings, each span-anchored to a ledger claim_id; tools/adjudicate_findings.py DECIDES the verdict. Leakage and under-reporting are usually HONEST methodological errors — every finding describes a discrepancy to CHECK, never an accusation. An LLM generating GROUND-TRUTH labels is HP-FAKE-GT (experiment-forensics) — routed there, not here. Emits eval-design-forensics.findings.json; computes NO verdict. Detect-only. Triggers: "eval design audit", "evaluation validity", "train/test leakage", "data leakage", "is the score measuring generalization", "LLM judge bias", "is the judge validated", "selective reporting", "cherry-picked results", "评估设计审计", "评测有效性", "数据泄漏", "训练测试集泄漏", "裁判模型有没有验证", "选择性报告".

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。

MEMO-ONLY prior-work overlap advisory: surfaces the two ADVISORY taxonomy signals neither a tool nor a model can decide from the paper alone — ADV-TRIVIAL-COMBINATION (standard A+B+C / 缝合 stapling) and ADV-DUPLICATE-PUBLICATION (repackaged / duplicate submission). The executor RETRIEVES candidate prior work (DBLP fuzzy-title + boolean · WebSearch · WebFetch) from the paper's own title + contribution spans in the evidence ledger; TWO fresh cross-model codex reviewers (one per axis) LAY OUT the overlap side-by-side against each anchored contribution claim. It NEVER rules 'trivial' or 'duplicate' (that is a human judgment) and absence of a match is NOT evidence of originality. Emits novelty-duplication-advisory.memo.md + an info-only findings mirror; carries NO verdict weight — tools/adjudicate_findings.py lists it in ZERO_WEIGHT_SKILLS and caps it at info. Detect-only. Adapted from ARIS novelty-check, reframed from 'is MY idea novel' to 'here is the overlap a reviewer should weigh'. Triggers: "novelty advisory", "duplication check", "prior-work overlap", "is this stapling", "缝合", "查重", "重复发表", "duplicate submission".

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 whether a paper's baseline comparisons are COMPLETE, FAIR, and SIGNIFICANT: a required recent SOTA baseline is missing while 'best/SOTA' is claimed (HP-MISSING-BASELINE); a baseline is undertuned / given less compute-tuning-data, run at a mismatched config, or the equal-budget ablation-as-baseline is absent (HP-WEAK-BASELINE); 'outperforms' is asserted over overlapping error bars or with no variance/seeds (HP-SIG-OVERLAP); and a cross-row 'improves over baseline by X%' is arithmetically wrong (HP-DELTA-ERROR, cross-row form only). A versioned per-domain baseline profile + a live leaderboard/recency search are assembled by the EXECUTOR as structured facts; a fresh cross-model reviewer (gpt-5.6-sol xhigh, read-only, fresh thread per dimension) PROPOSES findings, each span-anchored to a ledger claim_id; tools/adjudicate_findings.py DECIDES the verdict. Works at L0 (stated comparisons) and deepens at L2 (configs/result files). A completeness question it cannot settle internally becomes needs_external_check, never a guessed missing baseline. Emits baseline-comparison-audit.findings.json; computes NO verdict. Detect-only. Triggers: "baseline audit", "missing baselines", "is the comparison fair", "weak baseline", "baseline 误报", "SOTA earned?".

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。

Citation-integrity forensics: is every reference real, correctly attributed, and used in a context the cited work actually supports? Catches hallucinated references (no paper at the claimed arXiv id/DOI/venue, fabricated authors/year), metadata drift (wrong year/venue/version), and wrong-context citations (a real paper cited for a claim it never makes — or argues against). A hot zone for machine-generated papers. Decidable at L0 (text + canonical sources). Span-anchored to the evidence ledger (claims.json); the executor gathers canonical facts (DBLP / arXiv / DOI), then one FRESH cross-model thread per cited key proposes findings; reviewer != adjudicator. Emits citation-forensics.findings.json; NEVER computes the verdict. Triggers: "citation forensics", "check the references", "hallucinated citations", "wrong-context citation", "verify references", "引用核对".

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。

Autonomous Agents workflow skill. Use this skill when the user needs Autonomous agents are AI systems that can independently decompose and the operator should preserve the upstream workflow, copied support files, and provenance before merging or handing off.

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。

Autonomous Agents workflow skill. Use this skill when the user needs Autonomous agents are AI systems that can independently decompose and the operator should preserve the upstream workflow, copied support files, and provenance before merging or handing off.

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。

Scan code or configuration for common security issues. Use when a mid-level developer needs a quick security pass.

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 a product description repo for a software product - prose documents that say, feature by feature and event by event, what the user sees, what they can do, and exactly what happens when they do it, including when they stop halfway. Drafted from the code and tests, verified against the running product with hand checklists, and triaged into a bug list. Works for canvas editors, web apps, CLIs, chat products, mobile apps, and libraries or SDKs. Use when asked to "write a product description for X", "describe the user experience of X", "document how X behaves for the user", "make a behavior-spec repo", or for an event-by-event account of an app's behavior rather than API docs. Also resumes or extends an existing product description repo.

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。

Preprocesses photographed sheets of many business cards — slicing each into overlapping high-resolution tiles and de-glaring them with container tooling (OpenCV/ImageMagick) — then reads every card via cheap parallel temperature-0 API calls (Haiku or Sonnet) using a distilled extraction prompt, and writes deduped contact fields to a CSV. Use when a user has photos or scans holding multiple business cards per image, mentions glare or unreadable cards, batch card transcription, contact extraction, or wants to read many cards without an expensive in-conversation pass. Triggers on 'business cards', 'card scan', 'extract contacts', 'read these cards', 'card glare', 'too many cards per photo'.

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。