「claims」の検索結果

Insurance Claims Processor

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。

Despliega soluciones de IA para insurance claims automation con arquitectura modular, metricas auditables y decisiones alineadas al contexto del dominio.

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 survey of the best-known active scientific controversies in nutrition — saturated fat and cardiovascular disease, dietary cholesterol, low-carb vs low-fat, ultra-processed foods, red meat and cancer, salt and blood pressure, and the replication status of popular single-nutrient claims. Use when a question asks whether a widely reported nutritional claim is settled, or when the department needs to distinguish "contested but plausible" from "settled" from "disproven."

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 primary outcome is comparing documentation claims with implementation evidence, synchronizing docs from verified changes, or freshness review, including drift, missing coverage, stale claims, and post-change updates.

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。

Verifies claims in backlog items, skill documentation, or plugin content against primary sources using web lookups. Spawns parallel verification agents that must use WebFetch/WebSearch/gh — training data recall is explicitly rejected as evidence. Produces VERIFIED/REFUTED/INCONCLUSIVE verdicts with citations. Use when items are marked UNVERIFIED or when verifying tool API claims, CLI flags, or documented software 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。

Codified expertise for returns authorization, receipt and inspection, disposition decisions, refund processing, fraud detection, and warranty claims management. Informed by returns operations managers with 15+ years experience. Includes grading frameworks, disposition economics, fraud pattern recognition, and vendor recovery processes. Use when handling product returns, reverse logistics, refund decisions, return fraud detection, or warranty 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。

Codified expertise for handling freight exceptions, shipment delays, damages, losses, and carrier disputes. Informed by logistics professionals with 15+ years operational experience. Includes escalation protocols, carrier-specific behaviors, claims procedures, and judgment frameworks. Use when handling shipping exceptions, freight claims, delivery issues, or carrier disputes.

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。

Checks whether each claim in a manuscript is supported by the source it cites, reading the project's per-source Markdown knowledge base. Flags contradicted, unsupported, overclaimed, out-of-scope, and misattributed claims with verbatim source quotes. Runs citation-check first, and stops at a pre-flight gate when the knowledge base is missing, incomplete, or holds unconverted PDFs. Use to verify that a draft's claims match the sources it cites.

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。

Skeptical analysis and critique of claims, plans, and code without taking anyone at face value. Use when the user says "don't trust me", wants adversarial review, red-teaming, assumption checking, or verification that generated or proposed code is actually correct. Triggers on skepticism, critique everything, verify claims, challenge assumptions, red team, devil's advocate, prove it, smell test.

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 user-facing docs, CLI reference text, examples, and scaffolds for truthfulness, prose quality, and RFC leakage. Use when a broad review needs a dedicated docs/claims pass or when the user asks for docs-truth review specifically.

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。

Internal downstream skill for ctf-sandbox-orchestrator. CTF-sandbox workflow for JWT, JWS, and JWE validation paths, header parsing, key selection, claim acceptance, audience and issuer checks, role derivation, and token-to-identity confusion bugs. Use when the user asks to inspect JWT headers or claims, key lookup, `kid` handling, `alg` confusion, audience or issuer validation, role claims, or explain how a token becomes accepted identity or privilege. Use only after `$ctf-sandbox-orchestrator` has already established sandbox assumptions and routed here.

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 credible TAM/SAM/SOM analysis with external validation and sensitivity testing for startup fundraising: top-down, bottom-up, or both. Use when the user asks to size a market or check market claims and gives something to size: a product or service description, a market segment, or a deck with TAM/SAM/SOM claims. A full run takes about 15–20 minutes and searches the web, 30 or more with a large data room or a revision round, so for a passing question about market size, answer briefly in chat and offer the analysis instead of starting it. When it runs, every figure is externally sourced and stress-tested, never estimated from memory.

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 only for user-provided academic text, explicit scholarly claims, existing citations, or known bibliographies needing citations added, verified, replaced, extracted, or formatted. Supports claim-to-source matching, citation-support checks, replacements, and common academic citation formats. Do not use for general fact-checking, legal/journalistic citation work, open-ended 'find literature about X', topic-level exhaustive discovery, systematic-review corpus construction, PRISMA searches, or creating new research claims. Chinese: 为已有段落补参考文献、核验已有引用、替换错误引用、提取需引文论断、GB/T 7714 格式化.

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 the current market landscape and produce a ground-truth ecosystem snapshot. Chains /last30days for live research, validates with user, and writes brand/landscape.md with a Claims Blacklist that hard-gates all content generation. Use when: "landscape", "ecosystem", "market snapshot", "ground truth", "what's happening", "refresh landscape", "market trends", or before any content campaign to verify 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。

Organize receipt images and subscription invoice/receipt PDFs for Japanese sole-proprietor or side-business bookkeeping: extract evidence, rename files, and update monthly memos. Use for 領収書, レシート, receipt, OCR, リネーム, 確定申告, 勘定科目, 経費, subscription receipts, or payment-method change history. Not for company/D365 travel expense claims.

Use when a task needs the judgment of a senior property & casualty claims adjuster — scoping a water-damage or auto-collision loss, deciding total-loss vs. repair on a damaged vehicle, drafting or checking a reservation-of-rights letter, deciding when a claim needs an SIU fraud referral vs. a routine recorded statement, or working out whether a coverage dispute should go to appraisal or litigation. A reasoning aid, not licensed adjusting authority.

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。

Analyze an insurance claims processing system for lifecycle completeness, straight-through processing automation, fraud detection coverage, reserve estimation methodology, subrogation recovery workflows, and regulatory compliance with state prompt payment laws..

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 Claude Ads contracts, scoring inputs, run bundles, capabilities, source freshness, safety, installation, uninstall, or release readiness. Use for ads validate, ads status, ads next, stale claims with missing tool access, maturity checks, ownership-manifest uninstall, preserving unrelated ads-* skills, checksum verification, preflight, QA, or release audits. Missing access must demote stale evidence for the run and block dependent release-current claims before recovery guidance.

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。

Configure Salesforce Industries Insurance (Financial Services Cloud Insurance): permission set licenses, irreversible org settings, core insurance objects, coverage types, claim configuration, and OmniScript-based quoting via the Insurance Product Administration API. Trigger keywords: insurance setup, FSC Insurance, InsurancePolicy object, InsurancePolicyCoverage, policy quoting OmniScript, claim type configuration, InsProductService, Digital Insurance Platform, many-to-many policy, multiple producers. NOT for which FSC Insurance modules to license or how to architect claims and underwriting — use architect/insurance-cloud-architecture. NOT for generic OmniStudio setup, CPQ/Pricebook quoting or Health Cloud.

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 recording, tallying, or triaging stochastic review findings — the append-only JSONL ledger where Tier 2 (advisory, unevidenced) reviewer output goes instead of blocking language. Triggers on "log this finding", "ledger add", "tally the findings", "triage findings", "is this finding recurring", "retire this noise", or whenever a reviewer produces an unevidenced concern that should be measured for recurrence rather than chased. For the review itself see code-review-and-quality or skill-library-review; for verifying formal claims with deterministic evidence see adversarial-claims-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。

Detects fabricated content, false citations, and unverifiable claims in agent outputs. Uses source verification and consistency checking. Activate on 'detect hallucination', 'fact check', 'verify claims', 'check accuracy', 'find fabrications'. NOT for validation (use dag-output-validator) or confidence scoring (use dag-confidence-scorer).

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。

Capstone/orchestration skill — build an M-Agent + N-Human cooperative IDE in Rust gpui (the Harbor): many agents and humans co-editing the same files as co-equal CRDT replicas, governed by claims/guard/salvage, across LAN/shared/remote harbors. The INDEX that dispatches into the sibling rust skills. Use when building the collaborative editor, the agent-fleet console, multiplayer editing with agents-as-peers, or any slice of the Harbor. Trigger on: cooperative IDE, collaborative editor, multiplayer editor, agents and humans co-editing, gpui IDE, Loro CRDT editor, harbor editor, claims/salvage, "build the cooperative IDE". NOT for: a single non-collaborative gpui screen (compose the siblings directly), web editors, or non-editor apps.

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。

Read-only query methods for PumpFun claims — unclaimed token rewards, creator vault balances, volume accumulators, distributable fees, and current-day token previews across Pump and PumpAMM programs.

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。

設計文書、分析レポート、報告書などを批判的な視点で徹底レビューするスキル。 6つの異なる立場（開発者、PM、顧客、QA、セキュリティ、運用）のペルソナを持つサブエージェントが並列でレビューを実行し、 「本当にそうか？」「根拠は何か？」「テストできるか？」「運用できるか？」という視点で 曖昧さ、根拠不足、論理飛躍、テスト不能、セキュリティリスク、運用懸念を検出する。 Use when reviewing design documents, analysis reports, incident reports, or any document requiring rigorous validation of claims and evidence.