「gis」の検索結果

Review a bill of materials for cost, risk, and supply exposure — cost rollup, top-10 cost drivers, single-source and EOL risk, MOQ vs forecast mismatch, cost-down candidates, and tariff/logistics sensitivity. Use when asked to review a BOM, find cost-down opportunities, check component sourcing risk, or sanity-check BOM cost against target. Produces a structured BOM review with a cost driver Pareto, risk flags per line, and a prioritised cost-down list.

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。

Set up the essentials in the right order after moving to a new country — the ID/registration, bank account, phone, address, and social/tax number that unlock each other — so you don't get stuck in the chicken-and-egg loops that trap newcomers. Use when someone says 'I just moved to a new country', 'what do I do first after arriving', 'set up my life in [country]', or 'I can't open a bank account without an address but can't rent without a bank'. Produces a sequenced arrival checklist with dependencies and the official offices for each. Routes to official sources; rules are local.

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。

Analyse a construction bid or tender package for scope gaps, risk-shifting exclusions, unit-rate red flags, and front-loading in the schedule of values. Use when asked to review a bid, level bids, check a tender for gaps, compare sub quotes, or vet a schedule of values before award. Produces a structured bid review with a gap register, exclusion risk table, pricing red flags, and an award recommendation with pre-award clarifications.

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 formal board meeting minutes from an agenda, notes, transcript, or discussion summary. Use when asked to draft board minutes, governance minutes, meeting minutes for a board, or a formal record of decisions and actions. Produces structured board minutes with attendees, agenda items, resolutions, decisions, action register, and approval-ready wording.

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。

Provides Typer templates, handles registration, and ensures consistency. ALWAYS use this skill when adding or modifying CLI commands. Use when user requests to add/create/implement/build/write a new command (e.g., "add edit command", "create search feature") OR update/modify/change/edit an existing command.

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。

Systematic writing framework for philosophy and interdisciplinary academic papers from optimized outline to submission-ready manuscript. Use when users want to: (1) write a paper from a detailed outline, (2) ensure quality control during writing, (3) maintain consistency across chapters, (4) prepare a submission-ready manuscript, or (5) systematically execute a planned paper. Triggered by phrases like 'write the paper from this outline,' 'compose the full manuscript,' 'execute the outline,' or when users have completed strategic planning (academic-paper-strategist skill) and are ready to write. Takes optimized outline as input; outputs complete manuscript with iterative quality checks.

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。

Systematic strategic planning framework for philosophy and interdisciplinary academic papers targeting preprint platforms (PhilArchive, arXiv, PhilSci-Archive). Use when users want to: (1) plan a paper on a specific topic, (2) identify research gaps and assess originality, (3) develop optimized paper outlines, (4) prepare for preprint submission, or (5) understand platform requirements and writing standards. Triggered by phrases like 'plan a paper on,' 'help me design a paper about,' 'identify research gaps in,' 'is this idea original,' or when users need structured research planning. The skill guides through three phases: Platform Analysis (identifying target venue and studying sample papers), Theoretical Framework (AI-driven literature search and gap identification), and Outline Optimization (structured design with reviewer-perspective self-assessment). Each phase includes quality evaluation standards and validation checkpoints. Output: optimized detailed outline ready for systematic writing (use with academic-paper-composer skill).

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 executing a written implementation plan across sessions or with review checkpoints. Small or single-slice plans stay inline. For same-session independent tasks, use subagent-driven-development instead.

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 coding task needs a concurrent checkout, unrelated dirty state blocks safe branch switching, or the user or repository explicitly requires a worktree.

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 user asks to establish shared project language, or project work exposes a conflicting, renamed, or deprecated domain term that needs active semantic modeling. Routine small tasks stay on the fast path.

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, passing, verified, release-ready, or ready to commit, merge, publish, or hand 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。

Use when defining ambiguous or high-complexity new features, product behavior, UI/component design, architecture choices, contract changes, or when grilling/pressure-testing a plan or design. Routine small requests stay on the fast path.

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 requesting independent code review, after implementation slices, before merging high-risk work, or when verification exposes evidence, baseline, architecture, compatibility, or retirement uncertainty.

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 creating new skills, editing existing skills, or verifying skills work before deployment

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 user asks to create, write, update, amend, supersede, or evaluate an ADR, architecture decision record, durable architecture decision, decision log, or baseline sync after architecture-changing 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。

Use when facing 2+ independent tasks without a written plan, with no conflicting shared mutable state or sequential dependencies, where parallel delegation beats inline cost; otherwise inline. Planned tasks use subagent-driven-development.

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 task is multi-step, may span context resets or sessions, uses subagents, or risks losing state before completion.

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 before implementing suggestions, especially when feedback is unclear, risky, disputed, or technically questionable.

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 user asks for caveman mode, fewer tokens, brief responses, compressed communication, or otherwise explicitly requests a much shorter answer.

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 touching retiring old logic, collapsing duplicate owners, removing fallbacks, or schema/persistence/source-of-truth boundaries; identify opportunities automatically; destructive execution requires explicit confirmation.

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 verified work needs integration or cleanup of an existing task-created branch/worktree, or the user explicitly requests merge, PR, or branch lifecycle handling.

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 designing, changing, or reviewing user-facing interfaces or interaction flows, including API changes that alter visible states or recovery. Backend-only work without user-facing effects stays on its existing route.

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 executing a written implementation plan with independent tasks in the current session where delegation beats inline coordination cost; otherwise inline. Ad-hoc 2+ tasks without a plan use dispatching-parallel-agents.

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 asked for first-principles or Occam's-razor review, or when high-risk decisions involve competing constraints, fallback growth, duplicate owners, or architecture direction risk. Ordinary bug fixes stay on the fast path.

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。