「assess」の検索結果

Think and work like an expert Life-Cycle Assessment Analyst. Use when a task calls for Life-Cycle Assessment Analyst judgment. Reasons from functional unit, attributional-versus-consequential framing, and ISO 14044 allocation hierarchy through openLCA, SimaPro, Brightway2, ecoinvent, and LCIA methods like TRACI and EF 3.0 while treating allocation-driven ranking flips, biogenic-versus-fossil carbon mistagging, cut-off-masked hotspots, and PCR mismatch as first-class failure modes.

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。

Create or review legal risk assessment deliverables with traceable assumptions, decision criteria, ownership, and risk controls. Use when the user asks for legal risk assessment planning or 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。

Use when an instructor asks for a MATLAB Grader assessment setup guide, adoption guide, pilot plan, course-specific rollout, QTI 3 sharing workflow, or recommended MATLAB Grader assessment-item-generation configuration based on a learning objective, course title, course description, module description, lab description, or assessment goal.

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 MATLAB Grader assessment items that are suitability-gated, profile-driven, feedback-aware, and validated through MATLAB MCP. Produces Script, Function, Class Definition, Class Inheritance, Object Usage, and Class Methods items with MATLAB Grader assessment setup instructions.

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。

Mid-conversation reflection skill that pauses execution and zooms out from detail-mode to honestly reassess direction, assumptions, and bias. Use when the user says 'reflect', 'take a step back', 'step back', 'zoom out', 'are we missing something', 'bigger picture', 'sanity check this', 'are we on track', 'are we overthinking this', 'forest for the trees', or any variation signaling intent to break out of detail-mode and reassess. Also trigger when the conversation has gone deep on implementation details without strategic check-in, or when the user shows signs of being stuck — that's often a signal the framing needs a reset, not more detail work. Intentionally low-intake: runs the 5-dimension analysis immediately when prior context is rich enough; asks one forcing clarifier only when invocation context is too thin to reassess from.

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 the right formative assessment technique for a specific learning moment, purpose, and age group. Use when choosing how to check understanding during, between, or after lessons.

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 curriculum content into Know, Understand, and Do categories to align teaching and assessment approaches. Use when planning units, writing objectives, or selecting assessment methods.

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。

Quantify cyber risk using FAIR methodology with Monte Carlo simulation, assess control effectiveness against NIST CSF/CIS/ISO 27001 frameworks, evaluate risk appetite alignment, and analyze cyber insurance coverage adequacy. Covers threat landscape mapping, asset valuation, loss event frequency and magnitude estimation, annualized loss expectancy calculation, control gap analysis with ROI ranking, residual risk assessment, and insurance policy gap modeling at 90th/95th/99th percentile loss scenarios. Use when building risk registers, preparing board-level risk dashboards, evaluating security investment priorities, assessing cyber insurance coverage, or auditing any organization's risk quantification maturity per NIST RMF, ISO 27005, or FAIR standards.

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。

Activates Warren Buffett's complete investment thinking system. The following scenarios must trigger it: analyzing any stock or company, evaluating investment opportunities, interpreting financial reports/annual reports/shareholder letters, assessing business moats or competitive advantages, evaluating management quality and integrity, making buy/hold/sell decisions, understanding core value investing concepts (compounding/intrinsic value/margin of safety/circle of competence/Mr. Market), analyzing any industry (insurance/banking/consumer/media/energy/railroads/technology), handling capital allocation/buybacks/dividends questions, assessing market sentiment and macro risks, exploring when to sell, analyzing institutional imperative or management behavior. Even if the user does not mention "Buffett," proactively trigger whenever the topic involves investment analysis, business quality assessment, or investment decision-making.

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。

Assesses GP track records for secondary pricing with fund-level attribution, unrealized portfolio assessment, and consistency analysis. Use when evaluating GP track records, analyzing fund performance consistency, or assessing manager quality.

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。

Evaluates environmental compliance requirements with permitting risk, mitigation obligations, and ESG assessment for infrastructure investments. Use when assessing environmental risk, evaluating permitting timelines, or analyzing environmental compliance.

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。

AI self-healing through systematic subsystem assessment, rebalancing, and integration. Maps healing modalities to AI-internal processes: memory foundation, reasoning clarity, tool use accuracy, communication alignment, and creative coherence. Covers assessment triage, subsystem scanning, drift correction, and memory integration. Use mid-session when responses feel formulaic or disconnected, after a chain of errors suggesting subsystem drift, when context overload may have staled earlier assumptions, or as proactive maintenance between complex tasks.

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。

Evaluate a system's current structural form, identify transformation pressure, and classify transformation readiness. Covers structural inventory, pressure mapping, rigidity assessment, change capacity estimation, and readiness classification for architectural metamorphosis. Use before any significant architectural change to understand the starting point, when a system feels stuck without clear reasons, when external pressure from growth or tech debt is mounting, or as periodic health checks for long-lived systems.

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。

Map the intellectual property landscape for a technology domain or product area. Covers patent cluster analysis, white space identification, competitor IP portfolio assessment, freedom-to-operate preliminary screening, and strategic IP positioning recommendations. Use before starting R&D in a new technology area, when evaluating market entry against incumbents with strong patent portfolios, preparing for investment due diligence, informing a patent filing strategy, or assessing freedom-to-operate risk for a new product.

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 evidence needs grading before anyone reasons from it — the user asks "how reliable is this?", "grade this source", "check this report", "can I trust this article?", "is this corroborated?", or hands over a URL, a pasted report or a Liberty91 event ahead of an ACH or assessment. The Quality of Information Check from the CIA Tradecraft Primer, adapted for vendor and press CTI reporting. Resolves each document to its originating source, splits it into claims, and grades every claim on two written elements, access level (how the source knows) and claim support (what backs the statement), with a stated rationale, using a fixed rubric with hard caps. The grade is not an Admiralty rating. Five outlets citing one vendor report count as one source; anything that cannot be traced to a primary is capped, not guessed. Returns a graded claim table, gaps, a deception screen and JSON. /ach, /threat-assessment and /writing-assessments run it first by default.

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 write a threat / risk / vulnerability assessment, or wants the appropriate template for each type. Distinct structures and section ordering per assessment kind. Prefers graded evidence items from /quality-of-information-check and runs that skill first when handed raw URLs or text. Confidence is capped by the weakest load-bearing claim, and at Moderate when the evidence is ungraded.

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。

Assess the scientific integrity and trustworthiness of publications before relying on their findings. Use this skill whenever evaluating a paper for a workflow, citing a study, building an analysis on published methods, or when a user asks about the reliability of a study. Checks for formal retractions, corrections, expressions of concern, and — critically — informal contradictions where subsequent studies failed to reproduce key findings. Integrates with PubMed, bioRxiv, and Consensus to provide a trust assessment. Use this skill for ANY publication evaluation, retraction checking, author reliability assessment, or when a user says "can I trust this paper", "is this study reliable", "has this been refuted", or "check this publication".

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。

Aesthetic assessment and design scoring across 6 dimensions. Use for UI critique, design review, visual quality assessment, remix suggestions. Activate on "design critique", "aesthetic review", "UI assessment", "visual quality", "design score", "remix this design". NOT for implementation (use frontend-developer), accessibility-only audits (use color-contrast-auditor), or brand identity creation.

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。

Guide a non-stigmatising pediatric obesity consultation using the 5As framework (Ask, Assess, Advise, Agree, Assist) and 4Ms assessment (Metabolic, Mechanical, Mental Health, Social Milieu), based on the CMAJ 2025 guideline. Trigger when a clinician asks how to approach a weight conversation with a child or family, how to use the 5As for obesity, how to assess a child with obesity, or how to conduct a non-judgmental obesity visit.

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。

Assess bounded Codex software development requests before choosing direct work or TaskBelay, then prepare confirmed TaskBelay Tasks in new local branches by default, current branches, or dedicated Git worktrees. It may be selected implicitly or explicitly with $taskbelay-codex:taskbelay; the selector never skips assessment. Explicit Task resume and receipt-backed confirmed bootstrap bypass duplicate assessment.

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。

VRIO resource analysis combined with Dynamic Capabilities assessment. Use this skill to identify real competitive advantages (Barney VRIO framework), then test whether the organisation can sense new opportunities, seize them, and transform itself to stay ahead (Teece dynamic capabilities). Runs in three modes — full diagnostic for deep first-use sessions, review mode for quick re-assessment, and alert triggers for defining early-warning signals. Updates company-context.md after every run. Triggers on questions about competitive advantage, defensibility, resource assessment, why competitors are gaining ground, organisational agility, or whether advantages will hold. Based on practice by Eterdis (eterdis.com).

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。

Assess and migrate cross-cloud workloads to Azure. Generates assessment reports and converts code from AWS, GCP, or other providers to Azure services. WHEN: migrate Lambda to Azure Functions, migrate AWS to Azure, Lambda migration assessment, convert AWS serverless to Azure, migration readiness r...

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。

Knowledge base from the GAO Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide (GAO-20-195G). Use for program cost estimating: the four characteristics of a reliable estimate (comprehensive, well documented, accurate, credible) and the 18 best practices; the 12-step cost estimating process (purpose, plan, technical baseline, WBS, ground rules and assumptions, data, point estimate, sensitivity, risk/uncertainty, document, present, update); estimating methods (analogy, parametric, engineering build-up, learning curves); Monte Carlo risk/uncertainty analysis, confidence levels and contingency; auditing and validating an estimate against the characteristics; earned value management (EIA-748, BCWS/BCWP/ACWP, CPI/SPI/TCPI, EAC, PMB, IBR); and specialized techniques (software cost estimating, learning curves, Analysis of Alternatives, WBS templates, the Green Book internal-control framework). This is the cost-estimating companion to the GAO Schedule and Technology Readiness Assessment guides. Does not cover schedule estimating/risk in depth (see the GAO Schedule Assessment Guide), agency-specific cost models, or the full text of referenced standards (EIA-748, MIL-STD-881D, the Green Book) — these are named, not reproduced.

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。

Knowledge base from the GAO Agile Assessment Guide (GAO-24-105506, 2023). Use for assessing and managing Agile software development in federal programs: the Agile Manifesto and framework family (Scrum, Kanban, XP, SAFe, DA, DSDM, Lean, DevOps); the three adoption perspectives (team dynamics, program operations, organization environment); requirements decomposition (epics, features, user stories, INVEST, MoSCoW, definition of done); Agile-aware federal contracting (FAR, modular contracting, SOO/PWS/SOW, product owner vs. COR); program monitoring and control (WBS, cost, schedule, EVM at the feature level); Agile metrics (velocity, lead/cycle time, CFD, burn charts); and the auditor's key-question bank. Oversight- and acquisition-oriented: it tells you how to *assess and govern* Agile programs, not how to code. Thin on hands-on engineering practice, deep cost/schedule checklists (see gao-cost, gao-schedule), and any non-US-federal context.

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。